PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 


BY 

KERR  D.  J^ACMiLLAN 

PRESIDENT  OF  WELLS  COLLEGE 


PRINCETON  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
PRINCETON 

LONDON:  HUMPHREY  MILFORD 

OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

1917 


Copyright,  1917,  by 
PRINCETON  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

Published  November,  1917 
Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 


PREFACE 

The  spectacle  of  the  Protestant  nations  of  the 
earth  engaged  in  a  fratricidal  struggle,  the  issues 
of  which  are  essentially  moral  if  not  religious,  is 
a  direct  challenge  to  the  student  of  church  his- 
tory. For,  as  religion  is  the  most  influential 
factor  in  the  formation  of  the  character  of  any 
people,  it  is  important  to  ascertain  how  it  is 
possible  for  nations  with  the  same  religious  birth- 
right and  presumably  with  the  same  religious 
training  to  differ  so  widely  in  respect  to  moral 
ideals  and  conduct.  The  following  pages  are  not 
intended  primarily  to  answer  this  question  but  to 
give  some  account  of  the  progress  of  German 
Protestantism,  with  especial  reference  to  Luther's 
ideals  on  the  one  hand  and  to  the  state  control  of 
the  churches  on  the  other,  and  yet  no  one  can  read 
the  story  without  having  suggested  to  him  the 
explanation  of  many  of  the  phenomena  of  present 
day  German  life  and  thought.  Some  of  these 
suggestions  I  have  mentioned  in  the  last  chapter, 
but  very  briefly,  for  it  would  require  a  much 
larger  volume  than  this  to  handle  them  ade- 
quately. At  all  events,  the  present  war  cannot 
be  laid  at  Luther's  door,  as  M.  Paquier  attempts 
to  do,  for  the  Lutheran  church  as  it  developed 

after  Luther's  death  had  no  more  resemblance 

m 

M89174 


iv  PREFACE 

to  his  ideals  for  it  than  to  the  church  it  super- 
seded. The  transference  to  the  civil  authority 
of  all  the  powers,  prerogatives  and  privileges  for- 
merly possessed  by  the  Roman  hierarchy,  and  the 
investment  of  the  prince  with  all  the  authority 
in  both  church  and  state,  gave  the  opportunity 
to  a  strong  race  of  rulers  to  establish,  on  the  basis 
of  both  divine  and  human  law,  a  form  of  absolute 
monarchy  such  as  western  Christendom  has  never 
witnessed  elsewhere,  and  which  has  for  its  pre- 
supposition the  essentially  Roman  Catholic  and 
mediaeval  idea  of  the  submission  of  the  individual 
subject  to  the  prince-bishop  in  both  civil  and  re- 
ligious things. 

It  must  be  obvious  to  those  even  fairly  well 
informed  in  the  history  of  Protestantism  that 
there  is  a  remarkable  similarity  between  the 
mental  attitude  of  the  German  people  in  the 
period  of  "orthodoxy"  and  their  mental  attitude 
of  today.  In  the  seventeenth  century  their  out- 
look was  religious  and  today  it  is  political,  but 
both  then  and  now  there  is  evident  the  same  self- 
assurance,  the  same  contempt  of  criticism,  the 
same  claim  to  something  little  less  than  infalli- 
bility, the  same  "radiant  consciousness  of  right- 
eousness," the  same  arrogance  and  intolerance, 
and  the  same  inability  to  exercise  self-criticism 
or  to  apprize  themselves  any  less  highly  than  the 
most  flattering  adulation  suggests. 

One  of  the  problems  presented  to  the  historian 
by  the  war  is  how  to  account  for  this  childish  char- 


PREFACE  v 

acteristic,  for  such  it  surely  is,  dominating  a  whole 
people.  And  one  element  of  the  answer  will 
surely  be,  that  however  well  the  Germans  have 
been  trained  to  perform  the  functions  of  scholars, 
soldiers,  peasants  or  what  not,  they  have  never 
had  the  training  requisite  to  their  becoming  fair 
minded,  well  balanced,  mature  men.  "The  insti- 
tutions of  a  country  educate  the  people,"  and  the 
paternalism  which  has  characterized  the  German 
states  and  the  German  churches  during  the  last 
four  centuries  has  had  the  effect  of  keeping  the 
people,  as  far  as  political  knowledge  and  the  de- 
velopment of  personal  character  are  concerned, 
in  a  condition  of  perpetual  tutelage.  To  one  who 
has  lived  among  the  German  people  and  been 
fond  of  them,  and  has  learned  to  appreciate  their 
industry,  simplicity  and  straightforward  good- 
heartedness  under  law,  there  is  something  splen- 
did as  well  as  inexpressibly  sad  in  their  present 
mental  attitude.  The  consciousness  of  virtue 
shone  through  their  characterization  of  the 
Franco-Prussian  war  as  "Our  War  of  Liberty" 
or  "Our  Holy  War,"  and  the  sincere  belief  that 
God  would  use  them  to  punish  hypocritical  and 
cruel  England  for  her  iniquities  used  to  seem 
only  a  healthy  moral  reaction  to  the  stories  they 
had  heard  of  France's  degeneration  and  Eng- 
land's sin,  and  to  be  merely  a  transient  and  some- 
what amusing  phase  of  the  national  emotionalism 
which  displays  itself  so  delightfully  in  the  amen- 


vi  PREFACE 

ities  of  social  life.  But  those  who  control  the 
political  destinies  of  Germany  have  not  hesitated 
to  utilize  this  in  itself  beautiful  trait  to  unite  the 
whole  nation  and  lead  it  in  a  holy  enthusiasm 
whither  they  will,  just  as  equally  false  guides 
seven  hundred  years  ago  sold  into  slavery  the 
children  that  followed  them  "for  the  love  of  God" 
in  the  Children's  Crusade. 

There  is  a  very  large  German  literature  on  the 
origin  and  development  of  the  territorial  system, 
but  I  am  not  aware  of  any  English  work  cover- 
ing the  same  ground.  The  requirements  of  the 
lecture  platform  have  compelled  me  to  restrict 
myself  to  the  more  outstanding  features  of  the 
subject  and  to  a  limited  number  of  references, 
and  to  pass  over  many  details  of  fact  and  opinion 
that  might  have  been  profitably  introduced  in  a 
formal  history.  I  have  also  thought  it  best  to 
allow  German  scholars  to  speak  in  their  own 
words  very  frequently  lest  I  might  seem  to  have 
been  guilty  of  misrepresentation. 

Finally,  I  wish  to  thank  the  Faculty  of  Prince- 
ton Theological  Seminary  for  the  many  kind- 
nesses I  have  experienced  at  their  hands,  and 
especially  for  the  high  honor  they  conferred  upon 
me  in  inviting  me  in  1916-17  to  deliver  as  lec- 
tures on  the  L.  P.  Stone  Foundation  the  chapters 
of  this  volume. 

KERB,  D.  MACMILLAN. 
Wells  College, 

October  1,  1917. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Chapter  I 

Preface  iii 

The  Personal  Influence  of  Luther 1 

Chapter  II 

The   Early   Views   of   Luther   Regarding 
Church  Government 17 

Chapter  III 

The  Abandonment  of  Congregational  Self- 
Government   56 

Chapter  IV 
The  Establishment  of  the  Territorial  System     88 

Chapter  V 
Theories  and  Practice 124 

Chapter  VI 
The  Nineteenth  Century 164 

vii 


viii  CONTENTS 

/ 

Chapter  VII 

The  Effects  of  the  Territorial  System  Upon 
the  Church 218 

Chapter  VIII 
Other  Effects  of  the  Territorial  System 246 

Index  .  280 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

CHAPTER  I 

THE  PEESONAL  INFLUENCE  OF  LUTHER 

Whoever  wishes  to  understand  German  Prot- 
estantism must  constantly  have  in  mind  the  per- 
son and  the  writings  of  Martin  Luther.  The 
casual  visitor  in  Germany  is  amused  at  the  almost 
infinite  number  of  Luther  houses,  Luther  springs 
and  Luther  trees,  and  if  he  is  familiar  with  the 
language,  at  the  solemnity  with  which  the  peasant 
refers  to  "Doktor  Martin  Luther,"  or  quotes  his 
words.  But  only  a  survey  of  the  literature  from 
the  time  of  the  Reformation  to  the  present  can 
convey  an  adequate  conception  of  how  deeply 
rooted  and  how  influential  in  the  life  of  the  people 
this  reverence  has  been  and  still  is. 

Calvin's  system  of  doctrine  and  church  govern- 
ment has  been  more  widely  received  and  more 
influential  than  the  teaching  of  Luther,  but  the 
person  of  the  Genevan  Reformer  has  never  fasci- 
nated the  imagination  and  dominated  the  thought 
of  his  followers  as  has  that  of  Luther  in  Germany. 
Indeed  it  is  not  going  too  far  to  say  that  there 
is  no  one  in  the  western  European  countries  or 

i 


3  PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

America  that  has  occupied  such  an  exalted  place 
iii  $he  heart sr  of  his  fellow  countrymen.  As  long 
as>  be  lived  he  was  himself  the  standard  of  ortho- 
doxy, the  .creed  and  the  supreme  court  of  the 
churches  his  revolt  had  called  into  existence.  He 
was  constantly  consulted  on  matters  of  theology, 
morality,  church  government  and  politics,  and 
rarely  was  his  advice  unheeded.  Only  among  the 
lower  classes  after  the  Peasants'  War  was  he  dis- 
liked. After  his  death  there  was  no  one,  there 
could  be  no  one,  to  take  his  place. 

How  great  his  personal  influence  had  been 
and  what  a  void  his  death  made  are  indicated  in 
the  Preface  to  the  "Book  of  Concord"  where 
forty-seven  princes  and  thirty-four  cities  recall 
the  unity  that  was  characteristic  of  his  lifetime, 
lament  the  dissensions  and  dissemination  of  false 
doctrine  immediately  after  his  death  and  declare 
it  to  be  their  purpose  to  adhere  without  deviation 
to  the  Scriptures,  the  doctrines  set  forth  in  the 
early  ecumenical  councils  and  the  symbols  which 
had  received  the  stamp  of  Luther's  approval.  In 
this  determination  the  subscribers  simply  forecast 
what  was  to  be  the  attitude  of  the  great  majority 
of  German  Protestants  from  that  day  to  this. 
Luther's  successors  in  the  chair  of  theology  in 
Wittenberg,  and  Lutheran  divines  elsewhere, 
were  concerned  primarily  to  conserve  what  he 
had  taught.  The  final  authority  of  the  Bible  was 
always  asserted  indeed,  and  the  Lutheran  doc- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY  3 

trine  based  upon  its  teaching;  but  until  the  end 
of  what  is  called  the  "orthodox"  period  the  con- 
trolling factor  was  the  teaching  of  Luther,  which 
was  developed  in  infinite  detail,  though  not  al- 
ways in  line  with  Luther's  real  meaning. 

Among  the  churches  and  people  generally  he 
was  portrayed  as  prophet,  apostle,  knight,  teacher 
and  priest.  No  one  had  ever  done  so  much,  not 
only  for  theology  and  religion,  but  also  for  the 
cultivation  of  jurisprudence,  philosophy  and  ora- 
tory, or  for  the  peasant  and  military  classes.  The 
grammar  in  use  for  a  hundred  years  declared 
that  his  German  was  so  pure  that  he  must  have 
written  by  the  special  assistance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  gift  of  healing  was  ascribed  to  him. 
Splinters  of  wood  from  his  house  were  reported 
to  cure  toothache,  and  the  second  edition  of  a 
work  narrating  the  miraculous  preservation  of 
his  portraits  in  fire  was  printed  as  late  as  1765. 
His  translation  of  the  Bible  was  said  to  be  in- 
spired and  many  were  in  favor  of  raising  his  pri- 
vate writings  to  symbolical  rank. 

He  was  placed  in  the  circle  of  the  prophets 
also.  As  John  the  Baptist  had  been  the  second 
Elias,  Luther  was  the  third,  who  prepared  the 
way  for  the  return  of  the  Lord  to  judgment.  Or 
he  was  the  angel  of  the  fourteenth  chapter  of 
Revelation  flying  in  mid  heaven  and  proclaiming 
the  Gospel  to  all  peoples,  which  could  be  proved 
to  the  incredulous  by  reconstructing  the  letters 


4  PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

of  Rev.  xiv,  6,  according  to  their  numerical  value, 
with  the  result  that  they  formed  the  words  "Mar- 
tin Luther,  Doctor  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  born 
in  Eisleben,  baptized  on  St.  Martin's  day." 

In  short,  the  Lutherans  of  this  period  trans- 
ferred to  their  founder  as  many  of  the  character- 
istics of  the  saint,  and  came  as  near  to  worship- 
ping him,  as  their  creed  would  permit.  One  of 
the  first  critics  of  this  attitude,  the  Pietist  and 
church  historian  G.  Arnold,  was  quite  right  in 
characterizing  it  as  a  subtle  idolatry.1 

The  extreme  form  of  this  superstitious  rever- 
ence had  to  yield  before  the  advance  in  knowledge 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  and  the  eigh- 
teenth centuries.  The  quarrels  between  Pietism 
and  orthodoxy,  between  rationalism  and  the 
church  at  large,  and  the  ensuing  critical  study 
of  history  partly  dispelled  the  mists  obscuring 
the  real  figure  of  the  Reformer,  but  the  under- 
lying respect  and  reverence  for  him  were  not 
changed  thereby.  The  old  portrait  was  destroyed, 
or  rather,  instead  of  the  single  orthodox  one  there 
were  as  many  as  there  were  schools  of  thought. 
There  might  be  some  difficulty  in  knowing  which 
was  the  true  one,  but  at  all  events  Luther  himself 
remained  to  them. 

The  Pietists  were  among  the  first  to  criticize 
the  extreme  devotion  of  the  people  to  Luther, 

1  G.  Arnold,  Unparteiische  Kirchen  und  Ketzer  Historic, 
ii,  659  ff. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY  5 

for  it  interfered,  they  felt,  with  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  direct  access 
of  the  soul  to  God.  Moreover,  they  found  much 
in  Luther  himself  of  which  they  could  not  ap- 
prove, particularly  his  lightheartedness  and  jo- 
cosity on  the  one  hand  and  his  vehemence  on  the 
other.  In  general  they  denied  the  correctness  of 
the  picture  that  represented  him  as  the  hero  of 
orthodoxy,  and  claimed  him  as  their  own.  They 
pointed  out  that  the  Pietistic  teaching  concerning 
the  necessity  of  personal  religious  experience  and 
the  struggle  against  sin  corresponded  with  his 
religious  life,  and  they  justified  out  of  his  writings 
their  holding  of  conventicles  and  their  distrust  of  / 
philosophy.  But  in  the  discussion  that  ensued  / 
they  were  forced  to  draw  a  distinction  between 
the  earlier  and  later  teachings  of  the  Reformer 
and  to  attach  themselves  to  the  former. 

It  might  be  expected  that  the  intensely  human- 
istic period  of  the  Enlightenment  would  have 
little  sympathy  with  the  Reformer  who  had 
spoken  of  the  human  reason  as  the  product  of 
the  devil  which  the  would-be  Christian  must  tear 
out  as  the  Scripture  bids  us  tear  out  an  offending 
eye.  And  some  few  were  indeed  found  to  be- 
little his  services  and  give  all  the  credit  for  the 
Reformation  to  the  secular  princes.  But  the 
stream  of  national  devotion  to  the  great  hero  was 
too  strong  to  be  either  diverted  or  dammed.  The 
general  feeling  and  belief  of  the  "Enlightened" 


6  PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

was  that  Luther  was  one  of  themselves.  They 
recognized  him  as  the  conqueror  of  the  Church 
of  Rome  which  they  too  hated  as  he  had,  as  a 
man  of  independent  spirit  who  had  emphasized 
the  practical  side  of  religion  and  the  duties  of  the 
citizen — just  as  they  did. 

The  essential  parts  of  his  work  and  teaching 
were  forgotten  or  neglected,  and  in  place  of 
Luther  the  prophet  and  the  theologian  appeared 
in  almost  endless  variety  Luther  the  father,  the 
teacher,  the  citizen,  the  eager  searcher  after  truth, 
the  champion  of  freedom  of  conscience,  the  Bib- 
lical critic,  the  rationalist,  and  of  course,  in  con- 
trast to  the  Pietists,  Luther  the  jocular  and 
jovial,  who  enjoyed  all  that  life  could  offer.2  If 
he  had  lived  in  the  time  of  the  Enlightenment  he 
would  undoubtedly  have  been  one  of  its  leaders. 
He  was  unfortunately  limited  by  his  environ- 
ment. "Only  a  little  longer,"  says  one  writer, 
"and  the  heavenly  light,  that  Luther  could  see 
only  as  in  a  vision,  will  shine  upon  us  with  all  its 
brilliance." 

Another,  speaking  more  particularly,  thinks 
he  has  reached  the  heart  of  Luther's  work  when 
he  reduces  it  to  brotherly  love.  "It  was  genuine 
brotherly  love,"  he  says,  "that  moved  Luther  to 

2  One  of  the  verses  popularly  ascribed  to  him  was, 
"Who  loves  not  woman,  wine  and  song 
Remains  a  fool  his  whole  life  long/* 
There  is  no  proof  that  Luther  said  this. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY  7 

take  his  courageous  stand  against  the  abomina- 
tions and  errors  of  the  Roman  Church  and  allowed 
him  to  shirk  no  danger  in  furthering  the  good 
work.  Filled  with  the  sense  of  human  worth  he 
saw  with  sympathetic  disapproval  the  oppression 
of  the  people  by  the  papacy,  and  the  noble  deter- 
mination that  formed  itself  in  his  soul  at  the  same 
time,  to  bring  back  the  misguided  people  to  the 
original  dignity  of  rational  beings,  was  one  of  the 
mightiest  motives  of  the  Reformation.  It  ap- 
peared to  him  impossible  to  succeed  in  this  unless 
he  could  establish  a  firm  and  solid  intellectual 
basis  for  religious  truths,  a  basis  that  should  be 
comprehensible  to  everyone  and  subject  to  the 
least  possible  misunderstanding.  This  he  found 
in  the  Holy  Scriptures."  The  modern  German 
author  from  whom  the  quotation  is  taken  adds 
simply  "Could  the  real  state  of  affairs  be  worse 
represented,"  a  judgment  with  which  we  may 
well  agree.8 

The  Romanticism  of  the  early  nineteenth  cen- 
tury had  little  sympathy  for  the  struggles  of  the 
Reformation  and  yet  the  first  dramatic  portrayal 
of  Luther's  life,  that  of  Werner,  comes  from  this 
period  and  circle.  But  in  the  troublous  times 
that  succeeded  the  French  wars,  when  Germany 
was  still  smarting  from  her  defeats,  waking  to 

3  H.  Stephan,  Luther  in  den  Wandlungen  seiner  Kirche, 
Giessen,  1907.  63  f.  I  am  dependent  upon  Stephan  for 
other  quotations  in  this  chapter  also. 


8  PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

a  consciousness  of  the  shallowness  of  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  the  Enlightenment  and  feel- 
ing about  for  solid  ground  upon  which  to  rear  a 
new  political,  moral  and  religious  Germany,  all 
turned  again  as  if  by  instinct  to  the  great  hero 
of  the  Reformation.  Such  words  as  those  of  the 
philosopher  Fichte  ran  from  mouth  to  mouth, 
kindling  the  fire  of  religious  patriotism: 

"In  fine  classical  culture,  in  scholarship  and 
other  accomplishments,  he  was  surpassed  not 
only  by  foreigners  but  also  by  many  of  his  own 
nation.  But  an  all  powerful  motive  impelled 
him,  the  desire  for  eternal  salvation.  This  was 
the  life  in  his  life.  It  threw  everything  into  the 
balance,  and  gave  him  the  power  and  the  ability 
which  have  astounded  succeeding  generations. 
Others  may  have  had  earthly  motives  in  the 
Reformation,  but  they  would  never  have  been 
victorious  had  there  not  been  at  their  head  a 
leader  who  was  inspired  by  the  Eternal.  That 
he  who  constantly  had  before  his  eyes  the  picture 
of  immortal  souls  in  danger  of  destruction  fear- 
lessly advanced  to  meet  all  the  devils  in  hell  is 
simply  natural  and  not  to  be  wondered  at.  That 
is  an  example  of  German  high  mindedness  and 
courage."4 

The  historical  spirit  of  the  nineteenth  century 
could  not  accept  the  uncritical,  partly  erroneous 
and  partly  naive  picture  of  the  Reformer  that 

4Stephan,  91  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY  9 

had  satisfied  earlier  generations.  It  made  dili- 
gent search  for  the  truth,  trimming  away  the 
legends  that  had  accumulated  about  his  name, 
exploring  every  possible  hiding  place  for  a  frag- 
ment from  his  pen  or  anything  that  would  throw 
light  upon  his  life,  character  or  work.  A  defini- 
tive edition  of  his  works  began  to  appear  in  1883 
and  is  not  yet  completed.  All  schools  of  thought, 
even  the  Roman  Catholic,  have  contributed  to- 
ward the  attempt  at  a  better  understanding  of 
the  man.  His  relation  to  literature,  philosophy, 
education,  even  to  socialism,  as  well  as  his  services 
in  religion  and  theology  have  been  examined 
afresh.  And  the  result  is  that  he  appears  to  hold 
as  high  or,  if  possible,  a  higher  position  in  the 
German  consciousness  than  ever  before.  Not 
that  he  is  so  unreservedly  admired  as  was  once 
the  case,  but  the  general  impression  seems  to  be 
that  in  spite  of  his  mistakes,  or  shortcomings,  or 
the  limitations  imposed  by  his  historical  environ- 
ment, there  is  something  almost  superhuman 
about  him.  As  one  writer  says,  "The  genius  of 
Luther  is  so  much  richer  and  many  sided  than 
that  of  the  average  man  that  each  age  or  indi- 
vidual is  capable  of  understanding  and  appro- 
priating only  a  part."5 

Stuart  Chamberlain,  the  English  born  cham- 

6  Stephan,  131;  with  which  may  be  compared  the  esti- 
mate in  H.  Boehmer,  Luther  im  Lichte  der  neueren  Forsch- 
ung,  2nd  edition,  Leipzig,  1909. 


10          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

pion  of  Pan-Germanism,  declares  him  to  be  the 
genuine  German,  true  to  the  primitive  type 
("Urgerman")  and  contrasts  him  with  Ignatius 
Loyola,  the  incarnation  of  anti-Germanic  char- 
acteristics.6 Even  Nietzsche  is  compelled  to  give 
him  considerable  space.  His  opposition  to  Chris- 
tianity and  everything  that  savors  of  it  shows  it- 
self in  his  hatred  for  the  positive  side  of  Luther's 
work,  but  he  praises  him  for  having  taken  the 
first  step  in  loosing  Germany  from  the  fatal 
bonds  of  the  Christian  religion.  Luther  was  a 
peasant,  he  says,  and  remained  a  peasant  his  life 
long,  but  he  was  successful  in  leading  a  spiritual 
peasants'  revolt  against  the  exotic  southern  Ro- 
man gentlemen's  club  called  the  Church.  Like 
a  peasant  he  hit  out  right  and  left  without  know- 
ing or  caring  much  what  he  destroyed.  He  must 
be  credited,  therefore,  with  some  good,  but  also 
with  having  prepared  the  way  for  the  miserable 
pusillanimity  of  modern  democracy.7 

Indeed  it  is  safe  to  say  that  no  writer  on  re- 
ligious, historical  or  political  subjects  dares  to 
omit  Luther  from  his  program  or  fails  to  relate 
his  ideas  to  the  work  of  the  Reformer,  with  the 
usual  result  that  the  two  are  found  to  be  in  agree- 
ment except  in  so  far  as  Luther  is  said  to  have 
been  handicapped  by  the  political,  psychological 
or  religious  views  of  his  age.  The  orthodox  evan- 

6  Grundlagen  des  19ten  Jahrhunderts,  1899,  502. 

7  Frohliche  Wissenschaft. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          11 

gelical  party  of  the  Lutheran  church  is  satisfied 
with  him  with  little  or  no  change.  The  liberals  on 
the  other  hand  emphasize  his  freedom  of  thought 
and  claim  to  be  his  real  successors.  The  mystics 
assert  that  his  real  work  was  done  in  the  early 
years  of  his  activity,  while  he  was  still  under  the 
influence  of  the  mystical  theology.  Herrmann 
bases  his  "Communion  of  the  Christian  with 
God"  on  Luther.  Ritschl  was  sure  his  concep- 
tion of  Christianity  was  essentially  one  with  the 
Reformer's,  and  even  such  an  emancipated  Prot- 
estant as  Troeltsch,  who  believes  that  Luther 
turned  back  the  hands  on  the  clock  of  progress, 
and  that  the  real  Reformation  did  not  begin  until 
the  eighteenth  century,  nevertheless  concludes  his 
volume  on  "Protestantism  and  Progress"  with  a 
fine  eulogy  of  Luther's  "new  way,"  meaning 
thereby  salvation,  or  rather,  the  assurance  of  sal- 
vation by  faith  alone,  and  identifies  it,  mutatis 
mutandis,  with  his  own  position. 

The  advantage  of  inculcating  religious  and 
moral  truth  or  arousing  patriotic  feeling  by  the 
concrete  example  of  outstanding  personalities  is 
of  course  universally  recognized.  But  the  un- 
restricted and  general  admiration  of  any  fallible 
being,  however  great,  must  always  be  attended 
by  the  dangerous  tendency  to  confuse  the  best 
in  him  with  the  worst,  to  justify  all  that  he  did 
because  he  did  one  thing  well,  to  shut  out  from 
the  range  of  vision  of  his  admirers  those  things 


12         PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

which  he  did  not  see,  and  from  their  life  the 
things  he  did  not  do,  or  to  ascribe  to  him  those 
characteristics  of  their  own  for  which  they  seek 
justification.  In  short,  while  hero  worship  is  an 
excellent  tonic  for  a  person  or  a  nation,  it  is  likely, 
if  taken  in  large  doses,  to  interfere  with  one's  own 
best  development  by  imposing  an  external,  un- 
changeable standard  that  blocks  the  way  of 
progress. 

Something  of  this  sort  has  gone  on  in  Ger- 
many. A  flagrant  example  of  it  is  to  be  seen  in 
the  German  Bible.  This  translation,  the  work 
of  Luther  mainly,  was  constantly  revised  during 
his  lifetime,  no  one  being  more  cognizant  of  its 
shortcomings  than  he.  After  his  death  there  was 
no  attempt  at  carrying  on  the  work  of  improve- 
ment. The  name  "Luther's  Bible"  crowned  it 
with  a  halo  of  sanctity  which  protected  it  from 
profanation  by  emendators.  Even  in  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century  when  the  progress  in 
textual  criticism  and  the  better  knowledge  of  the 
Biblical  languages  compelled  the  united  churches 
to  action,  so  great  was  the  opposition  that  only 
such  changes  as  were  "necessary  and  unobjection- 
able" were  made,  with  the  result  that  many  of 
the  results  of  recent  scholarship  which  have  been 
incorporated  in  the  English  and  the  Swiss  re- 
visions are  lacking  in  the  German. 

But  the  deleterious  effects  of  this  hero  worship 
are  to  be  observed  in  a  still  larger  field  and  in 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          13 

greater  measure  in  the  constitution  of  the  Luth- 
eran churches  with  which  we  shall  be  concerned 
in  these  pages.  For  their  subjection  to  the  secu- 
lar authority  deprived  them  of  both  the  oversight 
of  spiritual  and  ecclesiastical  affairs  which  rightly 
belonged  to  them,  and  the  religious  and  moral 
discipline  which  has  been  so  beneficial  in  non- 
Lutheran  Protestant  churches,  and  at  the  same 
time  contributed  to  the  establishment  of  that  ab- 
solute monarchy  which  has  resisted  the  establish- 
ment of  democratic  institutions  more  strenuously 
than  any  other  government  in  western  Europe. 

The  principles  of  Luther's  revolt  demanded 
freedom  of  conscience  and  spiritual  liberty. 
None  of  the  Reformers  was  able  to  rise  above  the 
universal  opinions  of  their  time  regarding  the 
union  of  church  and  state.  But  they  all  did  see, 
Luther  quite  as  clearly  as  any,  that  the  faith 
upon  which  the  new  church  was  founded  could 
not,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  be  forced,  and  that 
the  church,  that  is  to  say,  a  congregation  of  be- 
lieving Christians,  having  for  its  end  the  cultiva- 
tion of  the  spiritual  life  and  the  administration 
of  the  sacraments,  should  be  free  from  every  kind 
of  external  control. 

When  Luther  tore  down  the  structure  of  the 
hierarchy  and  put  in  its  place  the  priesthood  of 
all  believers  the  logical  consequence  was,  and  the 
actual  result  should  have  been,  that  those  proper 
functions  of  the  church  which  had  previously  been 


14          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

performed  by  the  hierarchy  passed  into  the  hands 
of  Christian  believers.  The  so-called  Anabap- 
tists perceived  this  and  organized  along  most 
democratic  lines,  or  at  least  pretended  to  do  so. 
The  peasants  who  rose  in  semi-economic  religious 
revolt  at  this  time  perceived  it,  for  their  first  de- 
mand was  that  they  should  have  pastors  of  their 
own  choice.  Calvin  perceived  it  and  enforced  it, 
with  the  result  that  Calvinistic  churches  have 
been  notorious  for  their  resistance  to  external 
control.  But  the  Lutheran  churchesjn  Germany 
have  never  been  free,  nor  made  any  serious  at- 
tempt to  become  free  from  the  supervision,  direc- 
tion and  control  of  the  state. 

This  is  a  matter  over  which  there  has  been  much 
argument  in  Germany,  some  scholars  contending 
that  Luther  and  his  companions  favored  an  in- 
dependent church  with  graduated  courts  sim- 
ilar to  the  system  common  among  Calvinistic 
churches,8  others  that  they  wished  to  retain  the 
Episcopal  system,9  others  again  that  the  union 
of  church  and  state  with  the  subordination  of  the 
former  to  the  latter  was  their  ideal.10  Incidentally 

8  E.  g.  Richter,  Geschichte  der  evangelischen  Kirchen- 
verfassung,  1851.  Sohm,  Kirchenrecht. 

9E.  g.Stahl,  Kir chenver fas sung  nach  Lehre  und  Recht 
der  Protestanten,  1862. 

10  E.  g.  K.  Rieker,  Die  rechtliche  Stellung  der  evan- 
gelischen Kirche  Deutschlands,  Leipzig,  1893;  E.  Foerster, 
Die  Entstehung  der  preuszischen  LandesJeirche  unter  der 
Regierung  Konig  Friedrich  Wilhelms  des  Dritten,  Tubin- 
gen, 1905. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          15 

it  may  be  remarked  that  each  of  these  writers 
finds  his  own  views  corroborated  by  those  of  the 
great  Reformer. 

One  of  the  latest  and  most  painstaking  stu- 
dents of  the  constitutional  history  of  the  German 
churches  recognizes  and  condemns  this  prevailing 
tendency  in  the  following  words:  "Considering 
the  excessive  authority  enjoyed  by  Luther  in  the 
churches  that  bear  his  name  it  is  comprehensible 
that  the  parties  and  elements  striving  for  the 
highest  expression  of  church  life  endeavor  to  ac- 
commodate themselves  to  his  views,  and  to  realize 
his  ideals,  although  without  doubt  Luther  was 
very  far  from  regarding  his  thoughts  on  constitu- 
tional matters  as  normative  for  all  time."  n  That 
there  should  be  so  great  diversity  of  opinion  in 
the  settlement  of  this  historical  problem  is  not 
to  be  explained  by  Luther's  discursive  and  un- 
systematic manner  of  writing,  however  difficult 
this  may  make  any  attempt  to  formulate  his 
views.  The  real  reason  for  it  is  that  some  of 
these  writers,  like  their  predecessors  in  earlier 
centuries,  have  seen  Luther  through  glasses  col- 
ored by  their  own  desires,  and  read  into  his  say- 
ings their  own  ideals  of  church  organization  and 
of  the  relation  of  church  and  state.  Professor 
Seeberg  has  said  somewhere  that  Calvin  left  no 
questionable  coins  as  did  Melanchthon,  and  no 

11 E.  Sehling,  Geschichte  der  protestantischen  Kirchen- 
verfassung,  2nd  edition,  Leipzig,  1914,  5. 


16          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

unminted  gold  as  did  Luther.  The  writings  of 
Luther  are  indeed  a  wonderful  treasure  house 
from  which  much  may  yet  be  drawn,  but  it  is 
hoped  that  future  German  scholars  will  not  fall 
into  the  same  errors  as  did  earlier  ones,  namely, 
to  fail  to  recognize  the  gold  when  they  find  it,  or, 
worse  still,  to  bring  out  the  baser  metals  and  de- 
clare them  to  be  pure  gold.  Herder's  warning 
against  the  use  of  Luther's  works  by  the  ration- 
alism of  the  eighteenth  century  is  just  as  neces- 
sary today  as  a  hundred  years  ago:12  "O  Luther, 
would  that  thou  wert  alive  to  save  thy  books  from 
the  reproaches  they  now  endure,  and  to  see  the 
plans  and  samples  of  our  new  unbiblical  religion. 
'Tis  no  sprout  from  thy  root  that  now  blooms." 

12  Quoted  in  Herzog,  Realencyclopaedie  fiir  protestant- 
ische  Kirche  und  Theologie,  3rd  edition,  vii,  699.  Refer- 
ences to  this  encyclopaedia  are  hereafter  given  under  the 
abbreviation  RE. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  EARLY  VIEWS  OF  LUTHER  REGARDING 
CHURCH  GOVERNMENT 

After  the  prevalence  of  other  views  looking 
toward  the  introduction  of  self-government  into 
the  Protestant  churches  of  Germany,  it  has  re- 
cently been  argued  by  those  who  favor  the  pres- 
ent establishment  that  Luther's  doctrine  of  the 
universal  priesthood  of  believers  was  a  purely  re- 
ligious conception,  aimed  solely  at  the  arrogant 
claims  and  actual  power  of  the  Roman  hierarchy, 
and  therefore  without  relation  to  such  matters  as 
the  constitution  of  the  church,  the  organization 
of  the  congregational  life  or  the  relation  of  church 
to  state,  and  that  its  application  to  such  matters 
is  of  purely  modern  origin,  and  wrong.  To  quote 
Rieker:1 

"The  Protestant  principle  of  the  universal 
priesthood  is  a  religious  and  not  a  constitutional 
principle.  It  has  reference  to  the  relation  of  a 

1  P.  79.  Perhaps  the  clearest  proof  of  the  great  influence 
exercised  by  Rieker's  work  is  that  the  articles  in  the  third 
edition  of  the  Herzog  Realency clop ae die  on  the  organiza- 
tion and  legal  position  of  the  church  almost  all  adopt  his 
conclusions.  The  article  on  Staat  und  Kirche  is  a  notable 
exception. 

IT 


18          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Christian  to  God  and  not  to  his  position  in  the 
legal  organism  of  the  church.  The  application 
of  the  universal  priesthood  to  the  constitution  of 
the  evangelical  church  is  a  thoroughly  modern 
idea.  Just  as  the  attempt  is  made  to  base  the 
state  on  an  abstract  universal  citizenship,  so  also 
it  is  attempted  to  base  the  church  on  the  principle 
of  equality,  upon  an  abstract  universal  priest- 
hood, and  to  regard  this  as  genuinely  Protestant. 
The  principles  of  the  Reformation,  however,  and 
especially  the  view  of  Luther,  afford  another 
basis  for  the  constitution  of  the  church,  namely 
the  doctrine  of  the  two  or  three  estates  or  regi- 
ments. Luther  did  not  at  all  regard  the  indi- 
vidual Christians  as  having  equal  rights  in  the 
conduct  of  church  affairs,  but  as  differing  accord- 
ing to  the  estate  in  which  God  has  placed  them. 
He  who  exercises  civil  authority  has  other  duties 
in  the  matter  of  church  government  than  one  that 
teaches,  and  in  the  same  way  the  members  of  the 
third  estate,  the  heads  of  households,  are  con- 
cerned in  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  still  another 
fashion  than  the  civil  rulers  and  the  teachers. 

"According  to  the  Protestant  view  therefore,  in 
matters  pertaining  to  the  constitution  and  gov- 
ernment of  the  church,  individual  members  of  the 
church,  i.e.,  the  baptized  Christians,  are  not  con- 
sidered as  such,  but  their  part  is  conditioned  by 
and  graduated  according  to  the  position  they  oc- 
cupy and  the  work  they  do.  For  consider  whither 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          19 

this  principle  of  the  universal  priesthood  would 
lead  if  consistently  applied!  It  would  result  in 
the  dissolution,  not  the  establishment  of  congre- 
gations, in  the  complete  isolating  of  the  individual 
Christians,  in  the  grossest  form  of  independency. 
The  universal  priesthood  so  far  from  furnishing 
a  basis  upon  which  a  church  may  be  erected  ac- 
cording to  Protestant  principles  is  in  reality  the 
negation  of  all  organization." 

It  is  hard  to  know  whether  to  admire  the  au- 
dacity or  deplore  the  narrow  vision  exhibited  in 
this  passage ;  but  whether  we  admire  or  not,  there 
is  no  denying  that  in  it  we  have  the  interpretation 
of  the  principles  of  the  Reformation  and  the  pro- 
gram for  the  evangelical  churches  in  Germany  by 
which  a  number  of  German  scholars  endeavor  to 
perpetuate  the  subjection  of  the  church  to  the 
state  which  has  been  characteristic  of  German 
Protestantism  from  the  beginning.  In  a  sense 
every  word  of  the  passage  is  true,  and  neverthe- 
less it  is  altogether  misleading.  It  is  true  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  universal  priesthood  was  with 
Luther  a  religious  conception  and  aimed  at  the 
Roman  hierarchy,  but  it  is  false  to  imagine  that 
its  operation  should  be  or  could  be  restricted  to 
man's  relation  to  God,  or  that  Luther  wished  so 
to  confine  it.  The  subjection  of  the  individual 
will  and  individual  conscience  to  the  Roman 
church  was  not  only  a  religious  principle  in  the 
narrower  sense  of  the  term,  but  also  a  normative 


20          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

principle  for  all  religious,  political  and  social  life 
and  thought.  The  history  of  the  Middle  Ages 
can  be  written  around  it.  The  mechanism  of  the 
Roman  church  in  all  parts  of  the  world  existed 
because  of  it  and  was  dependent  upon  its  con- 
tinuance. It  is  therefore  extremely  shortsighted, 
to  say  the  least,  to  maintain  that  the  idea  that 
overthrew  the  colossal  ecclesiastical  and  political 
system  of  the  Middle  Ages  should  have  no  part 
in  building  up  its  successor.  The  doctrine  of  the 
universal  priesthood  of  believers,  having  both  a 
negative  and  a  positive  side,  was  bound,  if  unim- 
peded in  its  application,  both  to  destroy  the  exist- 
ing order  and  to  create  a  new  religious,  political, 
social  and  scientific  world.  Indeed  much  of  the 
history  of  Protestantism  is  concerned  with  the 
struggle  of  this  principle  to  assert  itself,  for  it 
has  not  been  everywhere  equally  successful  nor 
has  it  as  yet  spent  its  strength. 

It  is  true  also  that  as  a  rule  the  individual 
Christian  was  not  as  such  allowed  any  share  in 
the  management  or  government  of  the  Protestant 
churches  in  Germany.  But  this  is  only  a  state- 
ment of  fact,  and  does  not  take  into  account  the 
early  struggles  for  expression  by  the  individ- 
ual Christians  and  individual  congregations,  or 
Luther's  early  endeavors,  or  the  ideals  which  he 
felt  compelled  to  put  behind  him  for  a  time,  and 
which  his  church  has  never  realized. 

And  it  is  true  also  that,  taken  by  itself  and 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          21 

applied  consistently  by  itself,  the  principle  of 
the  universal  priesthood  of  believers  would  logi- 
cally lead  to  independency  and  even  to  individ- 
ualism. But  this  leaves  out  of  account  Christian 
love  and  Christian  brotherhood,  and  the  corre- 
sponding movement  toward  cooperation  and  mu- 
tual helpfulness  that  has  always  been  character- 
istic of  true  Christians,  whether  in  Roman  or 
Protestantism  times ;  and  it  passes  over  the  great 
outstanding  historical  fact  that  when  allowed  free 
play  the  doctrine  of  the  universal  priesthood  has 
led,  except  in  rare  instances,  not  to  independency, 
but  to  the  establishment  of  well  organized  and 
well  governed  churches  covering  a  territory  as 
large  as  linguistic,  racial  and  political  conditions 
would  permit. 

The  statement  that  Luther  regarded  the  priest- 
hood of  all  believers  as  a  doctrine  affecting  only 
the  religious  life  in  the  narrower  sense  of  the 
word  is  easily  and  sufficiently  refuted  by  his  own 
life,  for  it  was  the  compelling  power  of  this  new 
conception  that  led  him  not  only  to  break  with 
the  Roman  Church  and  demand  its  reformation, 
but  also  to  champion  the  cause  of  righteousness 
everywhere,  in  the  family,  society  and  politics. 
That  he  demanded  the  same  interest  and  effort 
of  all  Christians  is  everywhere  evident  in  his 
writings  and  nowhere  more  so  than  in  his  "Ad- 
dress to  the  Nobility"  which  has  been  perversely 
used  by  Rieker  in  defence  of  the  subjection  of 


83          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  church  to  the  state.  For  the  argument  in  this 
remarkable  appeal  to  the  German  rulers  is  not 
that  they,  as  rulers,  have  the  right  to  govern  the 
church,  but  that  as  divinely  ordained  rulers  they 
are  free  from  subjection  to  the  Roman  hierarchy, 
and  that  as  Christians,  and  therefore  priests,  like 
all  other  Christians,  they  should  be  guided  by 
Christian  ideals  and  actuated  by  Christian  mo- 
tives in  the  conduct  of  government.  It  is  an 
attempt  to  show  one  class  how  the  doctrine  of 
the  universal  priesthood  affects  their  lives  and  by 
implication  teaches  that  all  who  accept  the  new 
teaching  are  to  be  controlled  by  the  same  high 
considerations  in  all  they  do.  That  this  is  so  and 
that  Luther  tried  to  arouse  in  his  fellow  country- 
men a  sense  of  their  new  freedom  and  personal 
responsibility  will  be  made  clear  by  a  brief  survey 
of  his  teaching  and  his  endeavor  to  establish  con- 
gregations on  a  democratic  basis. 

Luther's  Reformation  began  with  his  discov- 
ery that  salvationjs^  the  free  gift  of  God  to  men 
through  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  this  gift  is  ap- 
propriated directly  by  faith  and  not  through  any 
human  mediator.  That  is  to  say,  that  each  in- 
dividual stands  immediately  in  the  presence  of 
God,  is  directly  responsible  to  him  and  receives 
directly  from  him  the  blessings  of  salvation. 
This  is  the  fact  which  expressed  as  doctrine  be- 
comes the  universal  priesthood  of  believers. 

In  this  Luther  found  assurance  of  his  own 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          23 

salvation  after  failing  to  find  it  in  the  sacraments 
and  ministrations  of  the  Roman  church;  and  in 
it  he  found  too,  as  St.  Paul  had  found  before,  a 
greater  incentive  to  pure,  holy  and  charitable 
living  than  was  afforded  by  the  legalism  or  semi- 
legalism  of  the  Roman  church.  This  is  the  heart 
and  core  of  Protestantism  and  to  it  Luther  al- 
ways remained  true.  It  is,  in  the  first  instance, 
a  jpurely  religious  conception  and  theoretically 
may  be  dissociated  from  any  and  all  ecclesiastical, 
social  and  political  forms.  Luther  himself  at  first 
saw  no  necessity  of  parting  with  the  Roman 
church,  nor  indeed  after  the  break  was  he  much 
concerned  over  forms  and  ceremonies.  He  dis- 
claimed any  desire  to  tie  the  new  churches  down 
to  one  form  of  government,  said  that  uniformity 
was  not  essential,2  and  generally  held  the  view 
that  "ceremonies  must  not  be  our  masters  as 
though  it  were  a  sin  to  do  otherwise.  For  we 
Christians  will  and  must  be  masters  of  such  cere- 
monies, so  that  they  do  not  grow  over  our  heads 
and  become  articles  of  faith,  but  must  be  sub- 
jected to  us  and  serve  us  when,  where  and  as  long 
as  we  please."  In  other  words,  Luther  was  con- 
cerned from  first  to  last  that  the  attitude  of  the 
individual  Christian  toward  God  and  his  fellow 

2  Luthers  Werke,  Weimar  Edition  (hereafter  cited  as 
WA),  xix,  72.  113.  Similar  passages  have  been  collected 
by  Sehling,  Die  evangelischen  Kirchenordnungen  des  seeks- 
zehnten  Jahrhunderts,  i,  p.  v. 


24          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

man  be  correct,  believing  if  this  condition  pre- 
vailed all  other  reforms  would  follow. 

It  is  important,  however,  to  note  that  this  is 
not  the  same  as  saying  that  the  new  Protestant- 
ism was  indifferent  to  outward  forms  and  cere- 
monies, or  that  it  could  exist  under  any  and  every 
form  of  organization.  Indeed,  this  is  the  very 
opposite  of  Luther's  meaning.  What  he  desired 
and  what  he  attempted  to  bring  into  existence 
was  an  organization  and  a  set  of  forms  that 
sprang  from  and  gave  expression  to  the  new 
ideas.  He  soon  discovered  for  himself  that  the 
new  conception  of  his  direct  responsibility  to 
God  was  incompatible  with  a  passive  attitude 
toward  the  evils  of  his  time.  His  protest  against 
trifling  with  sin  and  forgiveness  in  the  sale  of 
indulgences  led  to  the  larger  perception  that  the 
freedom  of  the  Christian  was  incompatible  with 
submission  to  Rome,  or  any  other  human  author- 
ity. By  the  year  1520  the  issue  was  perfectly 
plain.  He  burned  the  papal  bull  of  excommuni- 
cation and  the  Canon  Law,  told  his  students  that 
they  could  not  hope  for  salvation  unless  they  dis- 
sented with  their  whole  heart  from  the  papal  sys- 
tem, and  committed  himself  to  the  destruction  of 
the  old  order. 

His  writings  of  the  year  1520  show  that  he  had 
already  given  the  matter  of  reformation  consid- 
erable thought  and  that  he  pictured  to  himself  a 
condition  of  affairs  in  which  the  individual  Chris- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          25 

tians  should  share  in  the  responsibilty  for  the 
spiritual  welfare,  the  organization  and  mainte- 
nance of  the  congregation.  Indeed,  he  had  al- 
ready perceived  the  possible  danger  of  individual- 
ism and  was  prepared  with  an  answer. 

The  treatise  on  "Christian  Freedom"  gives  us 
a  clear  revelation  of  Luther's  conception  of  the 
Christian  life  in  general,  as  the  foundation  upon 
which  he  built  or  attempted  to  build  a  new  Ger- 
man church  and  German  nation.  It  is  the  posi- 
tive apologia  of  his  Reformation,  the  description 
of  what  he  found  within  himself  and  wished  to 
find  in  every  Christian.  Its  theme  is  the  paradox 
that  the  Christian  is  the  freest  of  all  men  and 
subject  to  none,  and  at  the  same  time  the  servant 
of  all  men  and  subject  to  all.  Spiritually  the 
Christian  is  free  from  all  bonds  and  prescriptions, 
for  piety  has  nothing  to  do  with  outward  forms, 
dress,  churches,  services,  fasts,  holy  days  or  law 
of  any  kind.  The  word  of  God  is  all  sufficient 
for  the  life  of  the  soul  for  in  it  are  found  abun- 
dantly life,  truth,  light,  peace,  righteousness,  sal- 
vation, joy,  liberty,  wisdom,  courage,  grace,  glory 
and  every  good  thing.  All  these  may  be  appro- 
priated by  faith,  but  the  law  cannot  give  them 
as  it  is  only  a  means  to  teach  men  the  uselessness 
of  their  own  efforts  to  attain  righteousness.  By 
faith  Christians  become  sons  of  God  and  united 
with  Christ.  As  the  bridegroom  shares  all  with 
his  bride,  so  Christ  gives  His  spiritual  treasures 


26          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

to  those  that  believe  on  Him.  As  He  is  spirit- 
ually king  and  priest,  so  are  they.  They  are  lord 
of  all  things,  for  all  things  work  together  for 
their  good,  and  instead  of  being  dependent  upon 
the  offices  of  others  they  have  immediate  access 
to  God  and  the  priestly  right  to  intercede  for 
others.  A  great  injustice  has  been  done  by  the 
use  of  the  terms  "clergy"  and  "laity,"  for  all 
Christians  are  equally  priests,  and  none  may 
claim  the  right  to  exercise  authority  over  others 
in  spiritual  things.  Those  that  have  been  called 
popes,  bishops  and  lords  are  only  ministers,  ser- 
vants and  stewards  for  teaching  the  faith  of 
Christ  and  the  liberty  of  believers. 

But  although  spiritually  free  from  all  law  the 
Christian  is  bound  by  a  double  bondage,  to  God 
by  faith  and  to  his  fellow  man  by  love.  The 
Christian's  life  is  not  altogether  spiritual,  nor 
does  he  live  to  himself  alone.  He  must  control 
his  own  fleshly  appetites  and  live  his  earthly  life 
among  men.  He  must  endeavor  to  bring  his 
actions  into  conformity  with  his  spiritual  life. 
This  endeavor  is  not  piety  but  the  result  of  it. 
Good  works  are  the  natural  and  inevitable  pro- 
duct of  faith  as  good  fruits  are  the  inevitable 
product  of  good  trees. 

"Who  then  can  comprehend  the  riches  and 
glory  of  the  Christian  life?  It  can  do  all  things, 
has  all  things,  and  is  in  want  of  nothing;  is  lord 
over  sin,  death  and  hell,  and  at  the  same  time 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          27 

is  the  obedient  and  useful  servant  of  all."  "From 
faith  flow  forth  love  and  joy  in  the  Lord;  and 
from  love  a  cheerful,  willing,  free  spirit,  disposed 
to  serve  our  neighbor  voluntarily,  without  taking 
any  account  of  gratitude  or  ingratitude,  praise 
or  blame,  gain  or  loss.  Its  object  is  not  to  lay 
men  under  obligations;  nor  does  it  distinguish 
between  friends  and  enemies,  or  look  to  grati- 
tude or  ingratitude ;  but  most  freely  and  willingly 
it  spends  itself  and  its  goods,  whether  it  loses 
them  through  ingratitude,  or  gains  good  will. 
For  thus  did  its  Father,  distributing  all  things 
to  all  men  abundantly  and  freely,  making  His  sun 
to  rise  upon  the  just  and  the  unjust.  Thus  too 
the  child  does  and  endures  nothing  except  from 
the  free  joy  with  which  it  delights  through  Christ 
in  God  the  giver  of  such  great  gifts."3 

It  was  with  this  ideal  of  the  Christian  life  which 
he  hoped  the  preaching  of  the  pure  Gospel  would 
soon  make  the  common  property  of  very  many 
that  Luther  planned  the  reformation  of  the 
church.  He  was  quite  conscious  of  the  great 
number  of  hypocrites  and  unworthy  members, 
but  appears  to  have  been  so  saturated  with  the 
joy  of  his  new  discovery  of  the  Gospel  that  he 
did  not  doubt  that  great  numbers  would  be  as 
much  enraptured  as  himself,  and  lead  such  self- 
sacrificing  lives  as  he  here  pictures.  Even  three 
years  later  he  was  so  persuaded  of  this  that  he 

3  WA,  vii,  66.     Translation  by  Dr.  Schaff. 


28          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

advised  civil  rulers  that  Christians  would  not  go 
to  law  even  to  defend  their  rights.  For  example, 
in  cases  involving  restitution,  if  both  parties  are 
Christians  there  would  be  no  need  for  the  civil 
authority  to  intervene,  for  "neither  will  wish  to 
deprive  the  other  of  his  property  or  even  to  dis- 
pute the  matter.  If  one  is  a  Christian,  namely 
the  one  that  has  been  defrauded,  the  matter  is 
equally  easy  of  solution,  for  he  will  lay  no  com- 
plaint, even  though  he  never  receive  his  property 
again.  And  if  it  be  a  Christian  that  has  done 
the  wrong  he  will  wish  to  make  restitution."4 
The  young  convent  bred  monk  was  an  eloquent 
preacher  of  the  ideal  righteousness  of  the  king- 
dom of  God,  and  of  the  love  that  should  charac- 
terize its  citizens,  but  he  had  neither  the  training 
nor  the  wisdom  requisite  for  the  regulation  of  a 
complex  society  in  which  selfish  interests  and  pas- 
sions are  inextricably  interwoven  with  high  ideals 
and  aspirations  in  all  the  activities  of  life. 

In  his  "Address  to  the  German  Nobility"  we 
have  Luther's  first  attempt  to  apply  the  doctrine 
of  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers  to  a  spe- 
cific problem  of  conduct.  A  reform  of  the  church 
in  head  and  members  was  generally  recognized 
to  be  necessary,  but  after  the  failure  of  the  coun- 
cils of  Pisa,  Constance  and  Basle  in  the  preceding 
century  to  make  any  breach  in  the  entrenchments 
of  the  papacy,  nothing  had  been  done.  The 

4  WA,  xi,  278  f . 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          29 

papacy  seemed  more  securely  established  and 
more  immune  from  successful  assault  than  ever 
before.  In  the  meantime,  Germany  was  suffer- 
ing religiously  and  morally  from  the  neglect  and 
the  positive  abuses  connected  with  the  papal  sys- 
tem. This  is  the  problem  which  Luther  faces  in 
the  "Address."  His  solution  is  that  all  Chris- 
tians, being  equally  members  of  the  body  of 
Christ,  that  is  of  the  church,  should  do  what  they 
severally  can  for  the  other  members;  and  espe- 
cially that  the  emperor  and  ruling  classes,  being 
ordained  of  God  for  the  punishment  of  evil  and 
the  promotion  of  good,  should  carry  their  Chris- 
tianity into  the  government,  and  purify  the 
church  and  society  in  accordance  with  the  re- 
quirements of  the  Gospel. 

There  are  three  walls,  he  says,  behind  which 
the  Roman  church  takes  refuge.  The  first  is  the 
distinction  between  spiritual  and  secular  with  the 
subordination  of  the  latter  to  the  former  in  mat- 
ters pertaining  to  private  life  and  to  government. 
This  distinction  has  no  satisfactory  basis.  All 
Christians  are  equally  holy,  equally  consecrated, 
"belong  truly  to  the  spiritual  estate  and  there  is 
no  difference  between  them  save  that  of  office." 
"For  whatever  has  crept  out  of  the  baptismal 
font  may  boast  of  having  been  consecrated  priest, 
bishop  and  pope,  though  it  is  not  seemly  for  every 
one  to  exercise  such  office." 6  The  office  of  priest, 

8  WA,  vi,  407. 
6  WA,  vi,  408. 


30          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

bishop  and  pope  is  to  preach  the  word  of  God 
and  dispense  the  sacraments;  that  of  the  secular 
authority  is  to  punish  the  evil  and  protect  the 
good ;  that  of  other  members  of  the  church,  shoe- 
makers, smiths,  peasants  and  so  forth,  is  to  serve 
the  other  members  of  the  community  with  their 
office  and  work,  all  members  being  equally  conse- 
crated priests  and  bishops.  It  follows,  therefore, 
that  the  so-called  spiritual  authorities  have  no 
authority  over  the  secular  authorities,  but  on  the 
contrary  the  secular  ruler  has  to  perform  the 
same  duty  toward  so-called  spiritual  persons  as 
toward  others.  And  "As  the  secular  ruler  is  a 
member  of  the  Christian  body,  and  although 
having  material  duties,  belongs  to  the  spiritual 
estate,  therefore  his  authority  ['werck']  should 
extend  unhindered  over  all  members  of  the  body, 
punishing  and  constraining  where  guilt  requires 
or  necessity  demands,  irrespective  of  pope,  bishop 
and  priests,  let  them  threaten  and  anathematize 
as  they  will."  7 

The  second  wall,  wKich  is  the  papal  claim  to 
the  exclusive  right  of  interpretation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, goes  down  before  a  similar  argument. 
Every  Christian  is  equally  entitled  to  interpret 
the  Scripture  and  to  judge  of  doctrine.  "As  we 
are  all  priests,  all  have  one  faith,  one  Gospel,  the 
same  sacraments,  why  should  we  not  have  the 
power  of  testing  and  judging  what  is  right  and 

7  WA,  vi,  4io. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          31 

wrong  in  the  matter  of  faith?"  "Therefore  it  be- 
hooves every  individual  Christian  to  take  an  in- 
terest in  his  faith,  to  understand  it  and  fight  for 
it,  and  to  condemn  all  error." 8 

The  third  wall,  namely  the  papal  claim  to  the 
exclusive  right  of  calling  general  councils,  is  de- 
molished in  the  same  way.  As  the  Scriptures 
order  the  individual  Christian  to  bring  a  sinning 
brother  before  the  congregation  (Matt,  xviii,  15) 
much  more  should  we  endeavor  to  bring  an  erring 
officer  before  a  council.  "Every  one  should  do 
what  he  best  can  as  a  true  member  of  the  whole 
body  to  bring  about  a  really  free  council,  and  no 
one  is  so  well  able  to  do  this  as  the  secular  rulers, 
especially  as  they  are  now  fellow  Christians,  fel- 
low priests,  fellow  clergy,  equally  powerful  in  all 
things,  and  should  exercise  their  authority  and 
office,  which  they  have  received  from  God,  over 
everyone."  9 

The  range  of  thought  in  the  "Address  to  the 
German  Nobility"  is  limited  of  course  by  the 
matter  in  hand.  We  should  not  look  here  for  any 
program  of  reconstruction  for  the  church.  Re- 
construction was  far  from  Luther's  mind. 
Priests,  bishops  and  pope  might  all  remain  if 
only  they  would  keep  within  the  bounds  set  by 
the  Gospel.  All  that  he  wished  was  reformation. 
Nor  may  we  expect  to  find  a  reasoned  definition 

8WA,  vi,  412. 
9WA,  vi,  413. 


32          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

of  the  universal  priesthood,  and  the  methods  of 
its  application  to  every  phase  of  life.  What  we 
have  is  a  considered  statement  of  what  its  effect 
should  be  upon  one  class  of  Christians,  the  secular 
rulers,  and  some  general  intimations  of  its  ef- 
fects upon  all. 

The  rulers  as  rulers  were  ordained  by  God  ac- 
cording to  the  Scriptures  and  had  as  their  duty 
to  punish  the  evil  and  protect  the  good.  But 
when  in  addition  to  being  rulers  they  were  also 
Christians  and  therefore  shared  equally,  neither 
more  nor  less,  with  all  other  Christians  the  re- 
sponsibility for  the  welfare  for  the  whole  body, 
their  conduct  as  rulers  was  to  be  dominated  by 
their  Christian  duties,  and  their  action  in  particu- 
lar events  to  be  guided  by  the  needs  of  the  church. 
In  their  case  certainly,  and  in  the  case  of  all 
Christians  by  implication,  Luther  asserts  that 
the  universal  priesthood  of  believers  shall  not  be 
a  purely  religious  concept  having  reference  only 
to  man's  relation  to  God,  but  shall  be  carried  into 
all  the  activities  of  life. 

Just  what  share  in  the  church  life  should  be 
accorded  to  other  members  Luther  does  not  tell 
us  here,  for  the  matter  was  not  in  his  mind.  As 
we  have  just  said,  he  was  not  planning  to  erect 
a  new  church  but  to  alter  the  old  one,  and  to  alter 
it,  we  may  add,  no  more  than  was  absolutely  re- 
quired. But  from  intimations  here  and  in  other 
of  his  writings  of  this  period  we  can  gather  what 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          33 

seems  to  have  been  in  his  mind  in  a  more  or  less 
unformed  state,  namely,  that  normally  and  prop- 
erly the  members  of  a  congregation  were  bound 
to  judge  of  doctrine,  had  the  right  and  the  duty 
to  call  and  dismiss  their  pastors,  exercise  disci- 
pline as  enjoined  in  the  Gospel  (Matt,  xviii), 
and  generally  to  control  and  manage  their  own 
congregational  affairs,  and  if  circumstances  ren- 
dered this  impossible  any  organization  or  form 
of  government  might  be  accepted  provided  the 
Gospel  was  preached  in  its  purity.  It  does  not 
seem  to  have  occurred  to  him  that  there  was  any 
inconsistency  in  calling  upon  the  secular  rulers 
to  reform  religion  and  manners  and  committing 
the  same  task  to  the  individual  congregations. 
He  did  not  picture  to  himself  a  church  in  which 
the  members  would  quarrel  about  their  several 
rights,  but  one  in  which  all  would  be  moved  by 
a  common  Christian  love  and  sense  of  duty. 

In  the  "Address  to  the  Nobility"  we  find  the 
statement  "and  so  we  learn  definitely  from  the 
Apostle  [Paul]  that  the  procedure  in  Christen- 
dom should  be  that  every  town  choose  from  the 
congregation  a  pious  and  learned  citizen,  to  whom 
the  pastoral  office  is  committed,  who  is  supported 
by  the  congregation,  and  at  liberty  to  marry  or 
remain  single  as  he  will,  also  that  he  shall  have 
associated  with  him  several  priests  or  deacons, 
married  or  single  as  they  will,  to  assist  in  the 
government  of  the  masses  and  the  congregation 


34          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

by  preaching  and  administering  the  sacrament."10 
In  the  "Exposition  of  Psalm  CX"  he  expresses 
the  same  idea: 

"So  you  see  each  individual  Christian  possesses 
and  exercises  such  priestly  offices.  But  apart 
from  this  there  is  also  the  communal  office  which 
cares  for  the  furtherance  and  advancement  of 
teaching.  For  this  pastors  and  preachers  are 
necessary.  For  it  is  impossible  for  everyone  in 
a  congregation  to  expect  to  exercise  this  office, 
just  as  it  is  not  convenient  to  baptize  and  dispense 
the  sacrament  of  the  Supper  in  any  and  every 
house.  For  this  reason  a  few  must  be  chosen  and 
ordained  to  preach  well  and  to  busy  themselves 
with  the  Holy  Scriptures  so  that  they  may  prop- 
erly exercise  the  office  of  teacher  and  defend  the 
doctrines,  as  well  as  dispense  the  sacraments  for 
the  congregation."11 

In  the  treatise  on  the  "Babylonian  Captivity" 
of  the  same  year  we  read:  "They  [the  priests] 
have  no  right  of  government  over  us  except  in  so 
far  as  we  allow  it  of  our  own  free  will.  .  .  .  And 
therefore  as  many  as  are  Christians  are  also 
priests,  and  those  whom  we  call  priests  are  min- 
isters chosen  by  us  who  do  all  things  in  our  name 
and  whose  priesthood  is  nothing  but  a  minis- 
try." 12  "And  therefore,  everyone  that  calls  him- 

10  WA,  vi,  440. 

11  Quoted    from   Richter,    Geschichte    der   evangelischen 
Kirchenverfassungf  14. 

12  WA,  vi,  564. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          35 

self  a  Christian  should  be  assured,  and  should 
consider  the  matter  very  seriously,  that  we  are 
all  equally  priests,  that  is  to  say,  that  we  have 
equal  authority  in  the  matter  of  the  word  of  God 
and  of  the  several  sacraments.  At  the  same  time 
it  is  behooving  that  individuals  do  not  exercise 
this  authority  except  with  the  approval  of  the 
congregation  or  the  call  of  superiors.  For  what 
belongs  to  all  in  common  cannot  be  appropriated 
to  himself  by  anyone  until  he  has  been  called 
thereto."13  Other  passages  of  similar  import 
may  be  found  scattered  through  Luther's  ser- 
mons and  other  writings  of  this  period. 

In  the  year  1523  he  published  two  well  con- 
sidered treatises  dealing  with  the  limitations  of 
the  power  of  the  secular  authority  on  the  one 
hand  and  the  rights  of  congregations  on  the 
other.  The  first  bears  the  title  "Concerning  Sec- 
ular Authority,  How  Far  Should  It  Be  Obeyed." 
Christians,  Luther  tells  us,  that  is  to  say,  rightly 
believing  Christians,  for  many  that  have  been 
baptized  do  not  deserve  the  name  and  are  not  to 
be  included,  do  not  require  the  supervision  of  the 
secular  authority,  but  are  governed  by  the  law 
of  Christ.  If  all  were  truly  Christian  there  would 
be  no  need  of  civil  government  at  all.  Neverthe- 
less the  Christian  is  to  submit  to  it  as  a  work  of 
love,  and  for  the  sake  of  the  others  among  whom 
he  lives  and  for  whom  the  secular  authority  exists. 

13  WA,  vi,  566. 


36          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

But  there  is  one  department  of  life  in  which  the 
civil  ruler  should  not  interfere,  and  where  he 
should  not  be  obeyed  if  he  does,  namely  the 
spiritual.  Secular  authority  does  not  extend  to 
the  hearts  and  souls  of  its  subjects.  "That  be- 
longs to  God  alone;  therefore,  in  matters  per- 
taining to  the  soul's  salvation  nothing  should  be 
taught  or  received  except  God's  Word." 14 

Faith  is  the  affair  of  the  individual,  "And  there- 
fore every  one  is  responsible  for  his  own  faith, 
and  must  himself  see  to  it  that  he  believes  aright." 
The  secular  authority  should  not  interfere,  for  it 
has  no  power  in  such  matters,  but  should  allow 
every  one  "to  believe  this  or  that,  as  he  can  or 
will,  and  force  no  one.  For  faith  is  free  and  no 
one  can  be  forced  to  it." 15  For  the  same  reason 
rulers  should  not  attempt  to  suppress  heresy  for 
it  is  also  a  spiritual  thing  and  must  be  fought 
with  spiritual  weapons  alone.  If,  however,  the 
secular  authority  does  attempt  to  interfere  in  the 
religious  life,  and,  for  instance,  demands  the  sur- 
render of  the  Bible,  as  some  Catholic  princes  were 
doing,  they  are  not  to  be  obeyed,  but  to  be  told 
"It  behooves  not  Lucifer  to  sit  beside  God.  Sire, 
I  owe  you  obedience  with  body  and  goods,  com- 
mand me  according  to  the  measure  of  your 
earthly  power  and  I  will  obey.  But  if  you  com- 
mand my  faith  and  demand  my  books  I  will  not 

14  WA,  xi,  263. 

15  WA,  xi,  264. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          37 

obey,  for  then  you  are  a  tyrant,  and  demand  too 
much,  and  command  what  you  have  not  the  right 
or  power  to  command."  If  after  this  the  prince 
uses  force,  the  Christian  is  to  suffer  in  patience, 
thanking  God  that  he  has  been  found  worthy  of 
suffering  for  the  Word.  Moreover,  "if  thou  dost 
not  withstand  him,  or  if  thou  dost  give  him  lib- 
erty to  take  thy  faith  or  thy  books,  then  truly 
thou  hast  denied  God."  "Not  a  leaf,  not  a  letter 
is  to  be  surrendered." 16 

This  definite  reference  to  his  translation  of  the 
Bible  is  particularly  illuminating,  for  it  tells  us 
at  once  that  Luther  did  not  fall  into  the  mistake 
of  thinking  that  a  man  might  exercise  his  faith 
in  God  without  obtruding  it  upon  the  world  about 
him.  On  the  contrary,  he  recognized  that  the  ac- 
ceptance of  the  Gospel  would  necessarily  bring  in 
its  train  outward  acts  which  might  be  in  conflict 
with  secular  laws,  and  demanded  with  no  uncer- 
tain voice  that  the  rulers  refrain  from  interfer- 
ence in  such  matters  and  that  their  Christian 
subjects  refuse  obedience  if  they  interfere. 

Rieker17  endeavors  to  weaken  the  force  of  the 
statements  in  this  treatise  by  saying  that  it  was 
written  by  Luther  in  view  of  the  suppression  of 
his  translation  of  the  Bible  by  some  Catholic 
princes,  and  that  we  are  not  justified,  therefore, 
in  applying  its  arguments  to  a  condition  of  affairs 

18  WA,  xi,  267. 
17  P.  60. 


38          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

where  the  prince  and  the  congregation  were  both 
of  the  reformed  faith.  It  is  true  that  the  treatise 
was  called  forth  by  just  this  condition  of  affairs, 
but  the  advocacy  of  the  rights  and  duties  of  con- 
gregations is  so  consistent  with  Luther's  funda- 
mental principle  of  the  universal  priesthood  of 
all  believers  and  so  consonant  with  what  he  says 
on  the  same  subject  when  there  was  no  such  par- 
ticular occasion  that  it  is  impossible  to  follow 
Rieker  in  the  conclusions  he  draws.  Rieker  bases 
the  argument  of  his  own  scholarly  work  on 
Luther's  "Address  to  the  German  Nobility,"  but 
he  neglects  to  point  out  that  this  too  was  an  oc- 
casional work  called  forth  by  the  necessity  of  find- 
ing some  one  to  undertake  the  task  of  reforma- 
tion which  the  Roman  hierarchy  refused.  All  of 
Luther's  writings  could  be  discounted  in  the  same 
way  and  for  the  same  reason. 

The  fact  that  Luther,  in  the  book  "On  Secular 
Authority,"  denies  to  civil  rulers  any  part  in  the 
suppression  of  heresy  shows  that  he  had  done 
what  the  tone  of  the  whole  work  implies,  namely, 
raised  himself  above  the  single  problem  afforded 
by  the  opposition  to  the  use  of  his  Bible,  and,  as 
far  as  possible,  dealt  with  the  larger  problem  of 
the  limitations  of  the  civil  ruler  in  respect  to  re- 
ligious matters  objectively.  -Rieker's  further  dis- 
paraging remark  to  the  effect  that  the  treatise 
contains  none  of  the  great  reformatory  ideas 
simply  shows  that  he  does  not  appreciate  it.  Nor 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          39 

is  this  surprising,  for  his  whole  book  is  a  defence 
of  the  system  in  which  the  church  is  subordinated 
and  subjected  to  the  state.  But  it  is  important 
for  several  reasons  to  note  that  what  Luther  is 
arguing  for  is  nothing  less  than  religious  liberty. 
We  dare  not  say  the  separation  of  church  and 
state,  for  Luther  had  no  conception  of  the  state 
as  we  know  it.  His  statement  that  there  would 
be  no  need  of  civil  government  if  all  were  Chris- 
tians is  sufficient  to  prove  this.  But  he  did  see 
that  religion  pertains  to  the  individual  and  that 
no  power  has  any  right  or  should  claim  any  right 
forcibly  to  interfere  with  it. 

The  other  treatise  of  this  year  enlightens  us 
still  further  concerning  what  Christians  may 
rightly  claim  to  be  within  their  own  jurisdiction. 
It  bears  the  very  descriptive  title,  "Proof  and 
Reason  from  the  Scriptures  that  a  Christian  As- 
sembly or  Congregation  Has  the  Right  and 
Power  to  Judge  All  Doctrines,  to  Call,  Install 
and  Dismiss  Teachers."  It  was  occasioned  by  a 
request  from  the  little  town  of  Leisnig  that 
Luther  aid  them  in  their  work  of  reform  by  "for- 
tifying the  pastoral  office  with  a  writing."  It  is 
therefore,  as  its  editor  in  the  Weimar  Edition  of 
Luther's  works  reminds  us,  "A  tentative  sketch 
for  the  constitution  of  a  congregation  not  of  the 
church.  The  inalienable  rights  of  the  congrega- 
tion are  opposed  to  the  historic  rights  of  the 
patron."18 

18  WA,  xi,  401. 


40          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

In  it  he  defines  a  Christian  congregation  as  an 
assembly  in  which  the  pure  Gospel  is  preached. 
No  bishop,  abbot,  priest,  emperor  or  other  author- 
ity is  necessary  to  its  existence  or  continuance. 
On  the  contrary,  in  the  congregation  itself  is 
vested  the  right,  and  upon  it  lies  the  duty,  of 
judging  doctrine  and  of  supplying  proper 
preaching  and  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments. The  persons  chosen  for  this  office  act  in 
the  name  of  and  for  the  congregation,  every 
member  of  which  has  an  equal  right  and  duty  to 
care  for  the  spiritual  well  being. 

This  Luther  considers  the  normal  or,  perhaps 
we  should  say,  the  ideal  condition.  But  he  con- 
templates also  congregations  and  individual 
Christians  in  other  circumstances.  For  instance, 
if  bishops  were  genuine,  Christian  bishops,  sit- 
ting in  the  places  of  the  Apostles  and  not  that 
of  the  devil,  they  might  induct  pastors,  but  even 
then  only  after  these  had  been  chosen  and  called 
by  the  congregation.  Again,  where  there  is  need, 
no  call  or  appointment  is  necessary.  The  indi- 
vidual Christian  amid  heathen  and  unbelievers  is 
inwardly  called  and  anointed  by  God  to  teach 
the  truth;  and  even  among  Christians  he  may, 
uncalled  by  men,  step  forward  and  teach  where 
he  sees  that  the  preacher  is  in  error,  provided  all 
is  done  decently  and  in  order.  "For  in  time  of 
such  need  (when  souls  are  in  danger  through 
being  denied  God's  Word),  each  and  every  one 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          41 

may  not  only  procure  a  preacher  either  by  peti- 
tion or  the  authority  of  the  civil  authority,  but 
is  himself  bound  to  run  to  the  front  and  teach. 
For  need  is  need  and  knows  no  law,  just  as  when 
there  is  a  fire  in  a  town  every  one  ought  to  run 
and  do  what  he  can  without  waiting  for  an  in- 
vitation." 19 

In  a  letter  to  the  Senate  and  people  of  Prague 
of  the  same  year  Luther  again  argues  that  every 
Christian  has  an  equal  right  to  preach  and  ad- 
minister the  sacraments  and  may  do  so  in  case 
of  necessity,  but  for  the  sake  of  order  and  con- 
venience in  every  community  one  or  more  should 
be  "chosen  or  accepted  to  exercise  this  right  in 
the  name  and  place  of  all,  who  nevertheless  have 
the  same  right."  For  this  reason  the  serious 
minded  Christians,  those  "whose  hearts  God  has 
touched,"  even  though  they  form  only  a  minority, 
should  come  together  voluntarily  and  elect  their 
pastors  and  bishops,  and  these  in  turn  may  also 
come  together  and  elect  one  or  more  of  their 
number  to  be  archbishops  whose  duty  shall  be 
"to  serve  and  visit  them  as  Peter  visited  the 
churches  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  In  this 
way  Bohemia  may  return  again  to  the  evangelical 
archiepiscopate  which  is  rich,  not  in  rents  and 
property,  but  in  much  service  and  visiting  the 
churches."30 

19  WA,  xi,  414. 

20  WA,  xii,  19S  f. 


42          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

It  is  obvious  from  these  references,  which  could 
easily  be  multiplied,  that  Luther  was  quite  alive 
to  the  far  reaching  effect  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
priesthood  of  all  believers  upon  the  organization 
of  the  church.  Instead  of  an  authority  all  but 
absolute  exercised  by  one  man,  the  pope,  through 
the  bishops  and  priests  over  all  Christians  in  re- 
ligious matters,  there  should  be  no  authority 
whatever,  or  rather  there  can  be  no  authority  but 
Christ.21  Priests  and  bishops  are  not  to  be  re- 
garded as  superiors,  but  as  servants  and  officials, 
for  they  are  no  higher  or  better  than  other  Chris- 
tians and  therefore  may  not  make  laws  or  "lay 
commands  upon  others  without  their  will  and  per- 
mission."22 This  is  fundamental.  Any  rule  or 
regiment  in  the  church,  to  use  Luther's  own  word, 
must  be  based  upon  the  consent  of  those  ruled. 
They  had  the  right  to  choose  their  own  pastor 
and  preacher,  and  to  dismiss  him;  or  if  he  came 
to  them  through  a  patron  they  had  the  right  to 
refuse  to  receive  him.  The  church  was  to  be  or- 
ganized from  the  bottom  up. 

What  Luther  said  in  words  was  soon  translated 
into  fact.  Individual  congregations  began  to  or- 
ganize along  these  lines.  In  Wittenberg  itself 
the  congregation  and  council  united  in  calling 
Bugenhagen.  In  Hamburg  the  congregation 
acted  without  the  council.  In  Orlamund,  coun- 

21 WA,  xi,  270. 
22  WA,  xi,  271. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          43 

cil  and  congregation  called  Carlstadt  without  the 
previous  consent  of  the  patron.  Examples  might 
be  multiplied.  One  of  the  most  interesting  of 
these  experiments  was  that  of  the  little  town  of 
Leisnig,  for  its  constitution  was  approved  by  the 
Reformer  and  commended  to  others  as  a  model.23 
Here  men  and  women  bound  themselves  together 
by  a  vow  to  lead  Christian  lives  and  to  establish 
a  system  of  church  discipline  which  was  to  be 
enforced  by  the  congregation  and  the  civil  magis- 
trate. They  announced  their  freedom  to  call, 
install  and  depose  their  own  pastors,  and  ordered 
a  common  treasury  to  be  under  the  control  of  ten 
men  elected  at  an  annual  meeting,  "two  of  whom 
were  to  be  noblemen,  two  from  the  ruling  council, 
three  from  the  common  citizens  of  the  town,  and 
three  from  the  peasants  on  the  land,"24  a  truly 
representative  body. 

In  Magdeburg  similar  action  was  taken  in  the 
following  year,  1524.  The  congregation  did  not 
wish  to  undertake  the  duties  of  self-government, 
and  so  asked  the  council  for  its  aid,  with  the  re- 
sult that  elders  were  appointed  from  the  council 
and  a  committee  from  the  congregation,  upon 
whom,  acting  together,  was  laid  the  duty  of  judg- 
ing doctrine,  calling  pastors  and  otherwise  gov- 
erning the  congregation.25  In  the  first  church 

23  DeWette,  Luthers  Brief  e,  ii,  379. 

24  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  i,  598. 

25  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  ii,  448  f. 


44          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

order  of  Prussia,  1525,26  discipline  was  placed  in 
the  hands  of  the  congregation,  and  in  the  Land 
Law27  of  the  same  year  the  congregation  was 
given  a  considerable  share  in  the  calling  of  pas- 
tors. But  by  far  the  most  pretentious  and  famous 
of  all  such  attempts  was  that  undertaken  in  the 
Duchy  of  Hesse. 

After  the  Diet  of  Spires,  1526,  at  which  the 
regulation  of  religion  in  the  several  German  prin- 
cipalities had  been  left  in  the  hands  of  the  princes, 
and  so  all  obstructions  to  the  reorganization  of 
the  church  removed,  steps  were  taken  to  apply 
Protestant  principles  on  a  larger  scale.  Philip 
of  Hesse,  infamous  on  account  of  his  bigamy,  but 
nevertheless  one  of  the  truest  friends  of  Protes- 
tantism and  one  of  the  wisest  rulers  of  his  day, 
was  the  first  to  make  the  attempt.  A  council 
was  called,  modelled,  it  was  claimed,  upon  the 
New  Testament  practice.  Not  only  the  clergy 
but  also  representatives  of  the  nobility  and  towns 
were  summoned  and  full  liberty  of  speech  guar- 
anteed. After  debate  it  was  decided  to  adopt  the 
Protestant  faith  and  a  constitution  for  the  new 
church  was  prepared  reflecting  the  spirit  of  its 
doctrines.  The  cornerstone  of  the  new  structure 
was  to  be  the  congregation  of  true  believers,  that 
is  to  say,  of  those  who,  after  the  preaching  of  the 
true  Gospel  for  a  considerable  period,  should  show 

29  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  iv,  SO  ff. 
27  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  iv,  38. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          45 

by  confession  and  manner  of  life  that  they  were 
serious  in  their  profession. 

To  this  conventus  fidelium,  to  which  women 
also  were  admitted,  was  committed  the  manage- 
ment of  the  church  in  general.  Acting  as  a  body 
or  through  officials  appointed  by  them,  pastor, 
elders  and  deacons,  they  were  to  have  charge  of 
the  teaching,  church  discipline,  care  of  the  poor, 
reception  of  persecuted  fugitives  from  other 
lands,  the  material  property  of  the  church,  etc. 
These  congregations  were  then  to  be  united  in 
one  national  church  by  the  establishment  of  a 
general  synod  which  was  to  meet  annually  and 
be  composed  of  the  pastors,  one  delegate  from 
each  congregation  and  the  nobility.  To  this  body 
was  committed  the  general  administration  of  the 
church  with  the  proviso  that  the  Scriptures  were 
to  be  the  only  law  and  norm.  A  committee  of 
the  synod  should  have  power  to  act  for  it  between 
its  sessions,  and  three  visitors  were  charged  with 
the  duty  of  examining  pastors  and  inspecting  the 
churches.  Provision  was  also  made  for  the  erec- 
tion of  a  Protestant  university  at  Marburg  and 
of  junior  schools  in  every  town  and  village.  And 
finally,  recognizing  that  the  constitution  could 
not  be  put  into  operation  until  the  congregations 
were  instructed  in  the  Word  of  God,  it  was  de- 
cided to  leave  the  appointment  of  pastors  in  the 
hands  of  the  reigning  prince  and  the  visitors  for 
one  year,  by  which  time  the  congregations  would 


46          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

be  sufficiently  trained  in  the  Gospel  to  take  over 
the  duty  themselves. 

This  plan,  for  it  was  only  a  plan,  is  obviously 
in  accord  with  the  principles  advocated  by 
Luther,  and  as  his  "German  Mass"  had  been 
published  a  few  months  earlier  a  direct  connec- 
tion between  them  cannot  be  doubted.  Other  in- 
fluences have  been  sought,  and  perhaps  cannot 
be  denied.  Francis  Lambert,  one  of  the  most 
influential  members  of  the  council,  was  a  French- 
man, a  Franciscan  and  acquainted  with  both  the 
Zwinglian  and  Lutheran  movements.  Philip 
himself  was  also  in  touch  with  movements  in  the 
south  and  west.28  But  this  simply  shows  that  as 
the  religious  conceptions  of  Protestants  were 
everywhere  fundamentally  the  same,  so  also  their 
application  to  the  organization  of  congregations 
and  churches  was  practically  identical. 

Unfortunately,  however,  the  plan  was  not 
to  be  put  into  operation.  For  Philip  of  Hesse, 
before  publishing  the  draft  or  giving  it  his 
sanction,  which  of  course  was  requisite  under 
the  terms  of  the  Diet  of  Spires,  asked  the 
opinion  of  Luther  and  received  in  reply  the 
advice  that  he  should  neither  sanction  the  plan 
nor  allow  it  to  be  printed.  As  might  be  ex- 

28  German  scholars  differ  widely  in  attempting  to  explain 
the  origin  of  the  plan,  ascribing  it  to  the  influence  of  Luther, 
the  Spiritual  Franciscans,  the  Waldenses,  Wycliff,  the  Bo- 
hemian Brethren,  the  Swiss  Reformation  and  others,  RE, 
viii,  294. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          47 

pected,  Luther  does  not  object  either  to  the 
principles  of  the  plan  or  to  the  plan  itself,  but 
he  thinks  it  is  not  suitable  to  the  present  condition 
of  affairs.  He  commends  to  the  Landgraf  the 
laws  of  Moses  of  which  almost  the  majority  were 
derived  from  custom,  and  urges  that  a  beginning 
be  made  in  a  small  way  by  training  a  few  pastors 
and  small  groups  of  individuals  with  the  aid  of 
simple  means  or  "a  little  book,"  such  as  was  used 
in  connection  with  the  Visitation  in  Saxony,  in 
the  expectation  that  the  movement  so  begun 
should  of  itself  call  into  being  the  institutions 
provided  for  in  the  plan.29 

The  result  was  that  the  plan  was  never  put 
into  operation  nor  even  published  until  modern 
times.  The  organization  of  the  church  in  Hesse 
followed  the  line  laid  down  by  Electoral  Saxony 
for  the  most  part.  The  University  of  Marburg 
came  into  being  almost  immediately  as  the  first 
Protestant  university  of  Germany,  and  a  few 
years  later  the  congregations  were  given  a  pres- 
byterial  organization,  which  though  falling  short 
of  the  ideal  of  the  plan  served  to  keep  alive  the 
ideals  of  Luther  and  the  Reformation  generally, 
and  had  considerable  influence  upon  other  Ger- 
man churches. 

But  how  did  it  come  about  that  Luther  appar- 
ently changed  front  and  gave  up  his  earlier  ideals 
as  soon  as  an  attempt  was  made  to  put  them  into 

29  Letter  of  Jan.  7,  1527. 


48          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

actual  practice?  To  this  the  answer  is  not  hard 
to  find.  In  the  first  place  Luther  did  not  give 
up  his  ideals,  but,  as  his  letter  to  the  Landgraf 
Philip  shows,  only  doubted  their  applicability  to 
the  Germany  of  that  time.  The  introduction  to 
his  "Deutsche  Messe"  (1526)  is  particularly  in- 
structive at  this  point,  for  it  shows  both  that  he 
still  adhered  to  his  former  ideals  and  that  he  had 
given  up  hope  of  seeing  them  realized  at  present. 
It  was  in  this  year  that  the  Recess  of  Spires 
made  it  legally  possible  for  princes  of  the  Empire 
to  organize  state  churches  on  other  than  Roman 
Catholic  lines  and  therefore  any  statement  of  the 
champion  of  the  new  faith  on  this  subject  might 
be  expected  to  exercise  a  particular  and  imme- 
diate influence.  Moreover,  there  was  real  need 
for  some  authoritative  statement  on  the  subject 
of  the  services  and  liturgy  of  the  new  churches. 
The  greatest  variety  was  noticeable  in  the  de- 
grees of  variation  from  the  Roman  mass,  in 
respect  to  language,  vestments,  singing,  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments  and  indeed  in  al- 
most everything. 

Luther's  "Deutsche  Messe"  was  his  answer  to 
numerous  appeals  for  advice  in  the  matter.  He 
disclaims  any  desire  to  dictate,  declares  as  often 
elsewhere  that  most  of  the  matters  in  dispute  are 
unimportant,  and  that  uniformity  is  by  no  means 
necessary,  though  it  is  advisable  for  the  churches 
in  each  state  to  observe  uniform  usages;  and  he 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          49 

then  proceeds  to  describe  the  services  appropriate 
for  the  new  faith.  In  the  first  place  he  would 
retain  the  Latin  service,  for,  Latin  being  the 
language  of  students  and  of  international  com- 
munications, many  would  profit  from  it  who 
could  not  understand  the  vernacular.  In  the  sec- 
ond place  there  should  be  a  German  mass  mod- 
elled on  the  old  Latin  service.  In  this  he  advises 
the  retention,  for  the  present,  of  the  vestments, 
altar,  altar  lights,  the  elevation  of  the  host  and 
many  other  characteristics  of  the  old  church, 
among  them  the  singing  of  the  Epistle,  the  Gos- 
pel and  the  Collects,  though  to  new  melodies. 
"These  services,"  he  says,  "are  for  the  edification 
of  the  youth  and  the  incitement  of  the  simple 
and  careless  who  are  to  be  found  in  the  majority 
everywhere.  They  should,  therefore,  be  as  public 
as  possible.  For  this  is  not  an  ordered  and  con- 
stant assembly  wherein  Christians  may  be  gov- 
erned according  to  the  Gospel;  but  is  a  public 
incitement  to  faith  and  to  Christianity."30  In 
other  words,  these  services  had  as  their  sole  pur- 
pose the  proclamation  of  the  Gospel,  and  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  mutual  edification  of 
Christians,  with  church  discipline  or  with  church 
government. 

But  Luther  by  no  means  lost  sight  of  these 
matters,  for  he  proceeds  immediately  to  say: 
"But  the  third  form,  which  a  proper  kind  of 

80  WA,  xix,  74. 


50          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

evangelical  order  should  have,  ought  not  to  be 
held  in  public  before  all  kinds  of  people;  but 
those  who  earnestly  desire  to  be  Christians  and 
confess  the  Gospel  in  word  and  deed  should  enrol 
themselves  by  name  and  gather  together  by 
themselves  somewhere  or  other  in  a  house,  to 
pray,  read,  baptize,  receive  the  sacrament  and 
perform  other  Christian  duties.  By  means  of 
this  order  it  would  be  possible  to  find  out,  punish, 
correct,  expel  and  excommunicate  those  that  did 
not  behave  as  Christians,  according  to  the  law 
of  Christ,  Matt,  xviii.  A  common  fund  also  could 
be  raised  by  levy  here  among  the  Christians  for 
distribution  among  the  poor,  after  the  example 
of  St.  Paul,  II  Cor.  ix.  In  this  service  not  so 
much  emphasis  need  be  laid  upon  the  singing, 
but  baptism  and  the  sacrament  [of  the  Lord's 
Supper]  could  be  celebrated  with  brief,  graceful 
['feine']  ceremony,  and  all  be  directed  toward 
the  Word,  prayer  and  love.  There  should  be  a 
good  short  Catechism  dealing  with  the  Creed, 
the  Ten  Commandments  and  the  Lord's  Prayer. 
In  short,  if  one  only  had  the  people  and  the  in- 
dividuals that  desired  earnestly  to  be  Christians 
the  order  and  forms  could  soon  be  prepared.  But 
I  have  not  been  able  to  institute  or  organize  such 
a  congregation  or  assembly  as  yet,  for  I  have 
not  suitable  people  or  individuals  for  it,  nor  do 
I  see  many  anxious  for  it. 

"If,  however,  the  time  comes  that  I  ought  to 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          51 

do  it  and  am  so  forced  thereto  that  I  cannot  con- 
scientiously refrain,  I  will  willingly  play  my  part 
and  help  to  the  best  of  my  ability.  But  just  now 
I  will  abide  by  the  two  forms  given  above  and 
help  to  promote  publicly  among  the  people  such 
a  form  of  service  as  will  edify  the  youth,  and  call 
and  incite  the  others  to  faith,  as  well  as  the 
preaching,  until  such  time  as  those  Christians 
who  are  serious  in  their  profession  assume  this 
of  themselves  and  govern  themselves  in  such 
manner  that  the  result  will  not  be  such  discord 
['Rotterei']  as  I  would  like  to  be  able  to  forget. 
For  we  Germans  are  a  wild,  rough,  restless  peo- 
ple among  whom  it  is  not  easy  to  introduce  any- 
thing new  even  in  case  of  the  gravest  need." 

What  Luther  outlines  here  is  identical,  as  far 
as  it  goes,  with  the  constitution  proposed  for  the 
church  in  Hesse,  and  as  the  "German  Mass"  was 
published  before  the  Synod  of  Homberg  met  it 
must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  influences  that 
guided  that  assembly.  It  is  also  clearly  quite 
consistent  with  his  earlier  writings.  The  distinc- 
tion between  those  that  take  their  Christian  pro- 
fession seriously  and  the  other  baptized  members 
of  the  church  is  not  new,  for  his  earlier  writings 
abound  with  passages  in  which  the  "rightly  be- 
lieving" are  contrasted  with  the  masses.  The 
proposed  commission  of  discipline  and  the  inner 
government  of  the  church  generally  to  the  former 
is  therefore  only  a  more  formal  and  definite  state- 


52          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

ment  of  the  principle  enunciated  in  the  church 
ordinance  of  Leisnig  and  elsewhere.31  It  is  sim- 
ply a  more  exact  definition  of  the  congregation, 
and  it  deserves  all  the  more  consideration  because 
of  this,  and  also  because  it  was  Luther's  last  and 
best  considered  attempt  to  provide  his  church 
with  a  constitution  in  keeping  with  its  religious 
principles. 

It  is  only  another  indication  of  Rieker's  in- 
ability to  appreciate  Luther's  vision  of  a  church 
in  whch  every  serious  minded  Christian,  actuated 
by  a  high  sense  of  his  direct  responsibility  to 
God,  should  share  equally  with  all  other  Chris- 
tians in  its  care  and  government,  when  he  says32 
that  this  proposed  third  order  is  not  really  ex- 
pressive of  Luther's  views  but  rather  sectarian, 
temporary  and  fleeting,  and  in  particular  that 
it  is  borrowed  from  the  Anabaptists,  who  ex- 
cluded from  their  fellowship  all  except  the  faith- 
ful. On  the  contrary,  if  there  is  any  place  where 
we  may  hope  to  find  Luther's  mature  thought 
on  the  matter  it  is  in  his  "German  Mass."  The 
subject  matter,  both  as  regards  the  organization 
of  the  congregation  and  the  liturgical  form  of 

31  So  also  Boehmer,  Luther  im  Lichte  der  neueren  Forsch- 
ung,  169,  who,  however,  thinks  that  Luther  did  not  insist 
upon  the  organization  of  the  churches  on  these  lines  be- 
cause he  believed  the  end  of  the  world  was  at  hand.  Luther's 
own  explanation,  namely,  that  he  could  not  find  suitable 
people,  is  simpler  and  quite  adequate. 

32  P.  76  ff. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          53 

the  services,  had  been  in  his  mind  for  years,83  and 
what  he  here  presented  to  his  church,  he  wrote 
with  full  realization  of  the  importance  that  would 
attach  to  it.  Moreover,  the  Peasants'  War  was 
over  and  the  Anabaptists  suppressed  for  the  pres- 
ent. Their  doctrines  and  practices  were  well 
known  and  had  been  roundly  condemned  by 
Luther,  so  that  if  he  here  enjoins  a  form  of  con- 
gregational government  which  in  some  points  re- 
sembles that  of  the  Anabaptists  it  cannot  be  be- 
cause he  is  under  their  influence,  but  rather  be- 
cause he  considers  it  too  important  for  his  own 
reform  to  be  surrendered  to  the  enemy. 

So  far,  therefore,  from  regarding  this  as  be- 
low the  level  of  Lutheran  thought  and  as 
containing  no  principle  of  genuine  evangelical 
church  government,  it  should  be  looked  upon,  as 
Bichter  says,34  as  a  melancholy  reminiscence  of 
what  might  have  been.  In  other  words,  this  is 
a  sad  confession  by  Luther  that  he  has  found  it 
impossible  to  carry  through  his  reform  as  he 
thinks  it  should  be  done,  and  at  the  same  time 
a  word  of  direction  to  the  church  which  he  has 
called  into  being  pointing  it  to  the  path  it  should 
follow  when  it  has  gathered  strength  for  the  task. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  Rieker's  estimate  of  the 
passage  expresses  the  real  thought  of  the  Luth- 
eran church.  For  the  Lutheran  church  has  re- 

88  Sec  the  Introduction  in  WA,  xix,  44  ff. 
34  P.  26. 


54          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

mained  in  the  unfinished  condition  outlined  in  the 
"German  Mass,"  a  teaching  church,  proclaiming 
the  gospel  of  salvation  to  all,  but  without  congre- 
gational self-government  or  congregational  life. 
As  Von  Zezschwitz  analyzes  it,  "It  is  funda- 
mental to  the  Lutheran  idea  of  church  and  doc- 
trine that  in  any  community,  the  larger  the  better, 
greater  weight  is  laid  upon  proffering  the  pure 
word  of  God  and  the  sacrament  as  means  of  eter- 
nal salvation  even  though  much  weakness,  sin  and 
error  on  the  part  of  the  members  must  thereby 
be  endured,  rather  than  that  all  the  members  of 
the  community  should  be  conscious  and  approved 
members  of  the  confessional  church."35  Such  a 
state  of  affairs  is  of  course  quite  well  known  else- 
where, but  it  is  contrary  to  the  ideals  of  the 
Calvinistic  churches,  which,  along  with  the  proc- 
lamation of  the  Gospel,  regard  it  as  of  prime 
importance  to  care  for  the  edification  and  con- 
stant growth  of  all  the  members. 

As  Professor  Sehling  puts  it,  "The  idea  of  the 
church  among  Calvinists  differs  from  that  among 
Lutherans  in  the  first  place  in  this,  that  the  Luth- 
eran church  is  an  institution  for  the  proclamation 
of  the  Gospel,  the  Calvinistic  church  is  a  school 
of  the  saints  ['Heiligunganstalt']."36  That 
Luther  had  this  latter  also  in  mind  for  his  church 
is  obvious  from  the  "German  Mass,"  and  that 

35  Quoted  by  Rieker,  77. 

36  Geschichte  der  protestantischen  Kirchenverfassung,  40. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          55 

he  despaired  of  introducing  it  for  a  time  does 
not  detract  from  its  importance  in  estimating  his 
ideals.  But  that  the  churches  called  after  his 
name  allowed  four  centuries  to  elapse  without 
answering  his  challenge  to  a  higher  and  freer 
congregational  life,  and  that  some  of  their  dis- 
tinguished members  deny  that  it  really  embodies 
his  thought  is  indeed  a  cause  for  wonder. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  ABANDONMENT  OF  CONGREGATIONAL  SELF- 
GO  VEENMENT 

As  has  been  said,  in  consenting  to  and  advising 
the  organization  of  churches  on  a  basis  other  than 
that  advocated  in  his  writings,  where  the  rights 
and  duties  of  the  individual  Christian  had  been 
recognized,  Luther  did  not  give  up  his  earlier 
ideal,  but  only  confessed  that  it  could  not  be  put 
into  practice  immediately.  This,  however,  in  it- 
self, is  a  change  of  so  much  importance  in  the 
history  of  the  Lutheran  church  and  of  Germany 
in  general  that  it  is  worth  while  to  point  out  what 
forces  were  at  work,  and  what  events  occurred 
to  bring  it  about. 

First  of  all  there  was  the  great  outstanding 
fact  of  the  existing  union  of  church  and  state. 
Since  the  days  of  Constantine,  and  more  par- 
ticularly after  Charlemagne,  there  had  been 
going  on  a  process  of  blending  which  by  the  six- 
teenth century  was  so  nearly  complete  that  the 
idea  of  a  separation  of  the  two  as  it  had  existed 
in  the  earliest  Christian  centuries,  or  exists  today, 
occurred  to  no  one  either  Protestant  or  Catholic. 
Each  had  its  own  organization  and  officials  and 

56 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          57 

its  own  sphere  of  activity,  but  the  people  over 
whom  they  ruled  were  the  same  in  either  case, 
and  the  two  jurisdictions  complemented  each 
other  in  such  fashion  that  the  suppression  of 
either  would  have  affected  seriously  the  social 
organism.  The  church  claimed,  and  as  a  rule 
exercised,  full  power  over  a  certain  class  of  peo- 
ple in  all  matters,  and  over  all  people  in  some 
matters.  The  state,  at  least  in  theory,  was  in- 
ferior to  and  subordinate  to  the  church  from 
which  it  derived  its  power,  recognized  its  juris- 
diction and  enforced  its  judgments. 

At  the  same  time  the  changes  of  the  preceding 
century  had  all  been  in  favor  of  the  state  as 
against  the  church.  The  church  was  believed  to 
be  rotten  in  head  and  members  and  badly  in  need 
of  reform.  Its  courts  were  corrupt  and  its  laws 
actuated  by  selfish  and  material  motives.  At- 
tempts to  reform  it  by  conciliar  action  had  failed, 
leaving  the  papacy  apparently  in  a  stronger  posi- 
tion than  ever;  but  in  reality  the  dissatisfaction 
was  only  increased,  and  the  individual  nations 
forced  to  defend  what  they  considered  their  lib- 
erties and  rights. 

Coincident  with  this  came  a  development  of 
national  sentiment  and  of  national  organization. 
The  standard  of  intelligence  and  education  was 
rising.  Vernacular  literatures  appeared.  People 
became  more  vividly  conscious  of  the  homeland 
and  proportionately  careless  of  the  international 


58          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

states  called  the  church  and  the  empire.  A  new 
theory  of  the  state  was  growing  up,  and  with  it 
more  adequate  machinery  for  accomplishing  its 
purposes.  The  loose  bond  of  feudal  times  with 
its  mutual  personal  obligations  was  giving  way 
to  a  conception  of  the  civil  government  which 
laid  upon  rulers  the  duty  of  caring  for  the  life 
and  welfare  of  their  subjects  and  the  right  of 
interfering  wherever  they  thought  necessary. 
Machiavelli  had  already  pictured  the  state  com- 
plete in  itself,  in  which  the  individual  disappears 
in  the  political  whole,  the  national  army  ensures 
peace  at  home  and  victory  abroad,  and  morality 
is  subordinated  to  political  expediency. 

These  influences  did  not  make  themselves  felt 
in  Germany  to  the  same  extent  as  in  some  other 
countries,  but  their  presence  is  evident  in  the 
gradual  loosening  of  the  imperial  authority  and 
the  corresponding  strengthening  of  the  individual 
princes  and  states.  Engaged  as  he  was  in  avoid- 
ing conflicts  or  repelling  attacks  by  the  Turks, 
the  French  and  the  papacy,  the  emperor  was  less 
able  than  ever  to  keep  his  German  vassals  in 
check.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  necessary  for 
him  to  have  their  undivided  support  for  the  suc- 
cessful propagation  of  his  foreign  policy;  and  for 
this  reason  he  was  forced  to  close  his  eyes  to  the 
many  indications  of  a  growing  independence, 
among  which  is  to  be  reckoned  the  ardent  support 
of  Luther  and  the  Lutheran  teachings. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          59 

As  for  the  German  princes  themselves,  they 
were  conscious  of  their  own  power,  and  prepared 
by  experience  to  interfere  in  matters  which,  ac- 
cording to  Canon  Law,  pertained  solely  to  the 
church.  As  advocates  of  the  church  (advocati 
ecclesiae)  and  patrons  of  ecclesiastical  founda- 
tions they  had  considerable  to  do  with  the  con- 
duct of  ecclesiastical  matters  and  particularly 
with  the  appointment  of  bishops  and  other  offi- 
cials. As  territorial  sovereigns  they  did  not  hesi- 
tate at  times  to  restrict  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
church  courts  and  the  activity  of  the  clergy  gen- 
erally. Frederick  the  Wise  had  forbidden  the 
sale  of  indulgences  before  Luther  published  his 
theses,  and  a  little  later  the  nobility  presented 
to  the  pope  a  list  of  one  hundred  grievances  with 
the  threat  that  if  he  did  not  remedy  them  they 
themselves  would  take  the  matter  in  hand.  In 
this  way  the  path  was  prepared  for  the  peculiar 
course  the  Reformation  followed  in  Germany,  a 
church  that  had  lost  the  confidence  of  all  classes 
and  would  do  nothing  to  improve  conditions,  an 
emperor  compelled  by  political  expediency  to 
acquiesce  in  the  practical  independence  of  his 
princely  vassals,  and  a  group  of  territorial  rulers 
whose  position  was  becoming  constantly  stronger, 
determined  to  have  a  reform  of  ecclesiastical  mat- 
ters even  though  they  themselves  had  to  bring 
it  about. 

To  this  must  be  added  Luther's  fiery  "Address 


60          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

to  the  Nobility,"  in  which  he  demolished  the  wall 
behind  which  the  ecclesiastics  had  taken  shelter 
and  which  no  one  hitherto  had  dared  to  storm, 
namely,  the  divine  right  of  the  church.  The 
nobles  were  told  that  they  were  equally  priests 
with  the  popes  and  bishops,  and  equally  responsi- 
ble as  Christians  for  the  welfare  of  the  church. 
Nay,  more,  the  divine  right  which  Luther  took 
from  the  church  he  transferred  to  the  civil  rulers, 
telling  them  and  their  subjects,  in  the  words  of 
St.  Paul,  that  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained 
of  God  and  that  opposition  to  the  rulers,  even 
though  they  be  tyrannical  and  unjust,  is  both 
crime  against  the  state  and  sin  against  God. 

This  explains,  therefore,  how  it  could  happen 
when  Luther's  case  came  before  the  Imperial 
Diet  that  the  German  princes  refused  simply  to 
execute  the  papal  judgment,  as  they  were  re- 
quired to  do  by  Canon  Law,  and  insisted  upon 
looking  into  the  matter  themselves,  and  that  when 
the  imperial  ban  had  been  added  to  that  of  the 
pope,  it  was  not  and  could  not  be  enforced  in 
many  of  the  states.  The  princes  were  conscious 
of  their  independent  strength  and  exercised  it, 
with  the  result  that  Germany  was  on  the  verge 
of  civil  war  when  its  united  energy  was  necessary 
to  repel  foreign  foes.  It  was  in  the  midst  of  such 
circumstances,  and  because  of  them,  that  at  the 
Diet  of  Spires  in  1526  it  was  unanimously  agreed 
that  "every  state  shall  so  live,  rule  and  believe 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          61 

as  it  may  hope  and  trust  to  answer  before  God 
and  his  imperial  majesty,"  until  such  time  as  the 
whole  religious  situation  should  be  reviewed  by 
a  general  council.  From  the  standpoint  of  the 
empire  and  the  church  this  was  only  a  temporary 
measure,  a  makeshift  to  tide  things  over  until  a 
more  favorable  opportunity  for  suppressing  the 
new  doctrines,  and  by  no  means  an  annulment  of 
the  edict  of  Worms.  But  to  the  Lutheran  princes 
and  cities  it  was  their  legal  justification  for  the 
recognition  and  establishment  of  the  Protestant 
faith.  To  them,  and  to  them  alone,  had  been 
committed  the  jus  reformandi  religionem,  a  right 
which  they  have  never  surrendered,  and  which 
led  to  the  formulation  of  the  historic  principle 
cujus  regio,  ejus  religio. 

Within  a  few  months  Philip  of  Hesse  called 
together  the  Council  of  Homberg  of  which  we 
have  just  heard;  and  a  little  later  the  Elector, 
John  of  Saxony,  ordered  a  visitation  of  the 
churches  in  his  territory,  thereby  laying  the 
foundations  of  a  church  organization  that  became 
normative  for  other  Protestant  states.  Looked 
at  from  the  political  standpoint,  therefore,  it  is 
easy  to  see  by  what  gradual  steps  German  Prot- 
estantism fell  into  the  hands  of  the  secular 
authorities,  especially  as  the  sporadic  attempts 
of  the  Protestant  churches  to  organize  on  a  demo- 
cratic basis  had  been,  in  the  opinion  of  Luther 
and  other  reformers,  productive  of  evil. 


62          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

It  is  impossible  to  tell  in  detail  how  each  church 
fared  that  had  been  organized  on  a  congrega- 
tional basis.  Many  of  these  more  democratic 
constitutions  disappeared  almost  immediately  and 
were  entirely  forgotten,  being  unearthed  only 
within  recent  years.  But  sufficient  information 
has  come  down  to  us,  concerning  the  difficulties 
and  the  excesses  unavoidably  connected  with  the 
quick  transition  from  a  despotic  to  a  popular 
form  of  church  government,  to  enable  us  to  see 
why  Luther  rightly  or  wrongly  after  five  years 
experience  deemed  it  expedient  to  leave  that  por- 
tion of  the  reform  to  a  later  and  more  enlight- 
ened time. 

No  sooner  had  he  denounced  the  Romish 
claims  to  spiritual  authority  and  summoned  all 
Christians  as  equally  entitled  to  interpret  the 
Word  and  administer  the  sacraments  to  the  work 
of  reform,  than  there  came  from  all  quarters, 
seemingly  in  obedience  to  his  call,  preachers  with 
other  and  strange  ideas  which  they  defended  out 
of  his  writings,  and  wished  to  put  into  operation 
immediately.  Moreover,  it  was  a  grave  and  le- 
gitimate question  just  where  the  outward  reform 
should  begin  and  with  what  speed  it  should  be 
carried  through.  Many  were  of  the  opinion  that 
a  clean  sweep  of  all  evils  and  abuses  should  be 
made  at  once.  Luther  held,  on  the  contrary,  that 
only  such  changes  as  were  absolutely  necessary 
should  be  made  at  the  beginning,  and  that  other 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          63 

reforms  would  follow  naturally  after  the  preach- 
ing of  the  pure  Gospel.  He  roundly  condemned 
the  riotous  destruction  of  church  property  as  the 
work  of  the  devil,1  and  feared  that  the  haste  of 
many  to  throw  off  the  Romish  law  was  due  to 
love  of  the  belly  and  material  goods.2 

Luther's  own  town  of  Wittenberg  with  the 
neighboring  villages  was  the  scene  of  one  of  the 
first  of  these  conflicts.  It  was  exceedingly  un- 
fortunate that  the  first  attempt  at  reconstruction 
should  have  taken  place  during  the  period  of  his 
retreat  in  the  Wartburg,  for  no  one  else  under- 
stood the  principles  of  the  new  movement  so  well 
as  he,  nor  was  there  any  one  so  well  qualified  for 
the  role  of  leader  or  of  mediator  between  the 
government  and  the  people.  What  would  have 
happened  had  he  been  at  home  it  is  of  course  im- 
possible to  say,  but  his  absence  compelled  smaller 
men  to  undertake  the  application  of  the  new 
principles,  and  allowed  entrance  to  strange  and 
dangerous  teachings.  There  were  many  groups 
of  individuals  and  several  bodies  vested  with 
some  authority,  but  the  only  person  with  any 
semblance  of  legal  authority  over  students,  citi- 
zens, guilds,  church  pastors,  university  professors 
and  monks  was  the  Elector,  and  he  was  very 
loath  to  act. 

1  Letters  to  Melanchthon  and  Spalatin,  DeWette,  Luthers 
Brief 'e,  ii,  7  f.,  31. 

2  Letter  to  Lange,  DeWette,  ii,  175. 


64          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

The  result  was  confusion.  Reforms  were  in- 
troduced, but  too  slowly  to  suit  many  of  the  peo- 
ple. Interruptions  of  the  church  services,  riotous 
and  destructive  demonstrations,  and  finally  a  per- 
emptory demand  caused  the  town  council  and  the 
religious  leaders  to  lay  aside  their  differences  and 
hasten  the  outward  reforms.  Among  other 
things  the  service  of  the  mass  was  completely 
altered,  the  cup  given  to  the  laity,  aural  confes- 
sion abolished  and  images  forcibly  removed  from 
the  churches.  This  in  turn  gave  offence  to  the 
Elector,  who  had  not  been  consulted.  He  called 
the  leaders  before  him,  including  Melanchthon 
and  Carlstadt,  charged  them  with  being  the  fo- 
menters  of  the  iconoclastic  riots  and  obtained 
from  them  a  promise  to  refrain  from  such  action 
in  the  future.  This  done,  he  ordered  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Roman  mass  in  its  entirety.  The 
leaders  felt  themselves  blocked  and  unable  to 
cope  with  the  situation  any  further.  They  sent 
an  urgent  message  to  Luther  telling  him  what 
had  happened  and  asking  him  to  return.  In  spite 
of  the  protestations  of  the  Elector,  Luther  came 
immediately  and  threw  himself  into  the  struggle 
with  all  his  strength.  A  series  of  vigorous  ser- 
mons preached  on  successive  days  soon  restored 
order.  He  condemned  the  innovations  and  the 
violence  of  the  people  on  several  grounds.  In 
the  first  place,  force  should  never  have  been  used; 
the  individual  citizen  has  no  right  to  take  the  law 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          65 

into  his  own  hands.  Secondly,  the  civil  author- 
ity, that  is  to  say,  the  Elector,  should  have  been 
consulted  and  his  approval  obtained.  And 
thirdly,  the  proceedings  had  been  too  hasty  and 
therefore  had  given  offence  to  weaker  brethren. 
The  last  point  is  the  one  upon  which  he  dwells. 

Reform  was  necessary  and  the  changes  must 
come  in  time.  But  the  way  to  bring  them  about 
was  not  by  violence  or  force,  but  by  instructing 
the  people  in  the  pure  Gospel,  after  which  they 
would  come  quietly  and  of  course.  Very  little 
was  said  of  obedience  to  the  civil  authority. 
Luther's  action  on  this  occasion  corresponds  en- 
tirely with  his  teaching.  He  abolished  most  of 
the  innovations  made  during  his  absence  and  gave 
himself  up  to  instructing  the  people.  After  hear- 
ing him  a  few  days  most  of  the  townspeople  and 
others  acquiesced  in  the  new  arrangement.  All 
the  leaders  too  were  apparently  content,  with  the 
exception  of  Carlstadt  who  kept  aloof  and  after 
a  little  while  withdrew  to  his  farm  in  the  neigh- 
borhood, where  he  continued  his  studies,  develop- 
ing in  particular  the  doctrine  of  the  equality  of 
all  Christians,  a  mystical  theory  of  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Scriptures  and  a  view  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per with  which  Luther  could  not  agree.  But 
Luther's  plan  was  not  successful.  The  inhab- 
itants of  Wittenberg  never  again  attempted  to 
take  the  matter  of  reform  into  their  own  hands, 
and  in  15243  he  bitterly  complains  of  their  con- 

8  Sermon  of  November  1$,  WA,  xv,  737  f. 


66          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tempt  for  the  Word  of  God  and  their  lack  of 
Christian  love  and  charity.  Whether  the  apathy 
was  in  any  way  the  result  of  the  repression  of 
the  first  popular  movement  may  remain  forever 
unsettled.4  The  outstanding  fact  is  that  Luther 
refused  to  lead  the  people  the  way  they  wished 
to  go,  and  failed  to  induce  them  to  follow  the 
path  he  marked  out  for  them. 

With  this  was  closely  connected  what  has  been 
called  the  Tragedy  of  Orlamund.  The  council 
and  congregation  of  this  little  town,  acting  on 
the  principle  laid  down  by  Luther,  admitted  to 
church  meetings  all  members  irrespective  of  rank, 
and  chose  Carlstadt  as  their  pastor,  the  man  who 
was  suspected  of  developing  ideas  contrary  to  the 
Gospel.  This  was  done  with  the  knowledge  and 
consent  of  the  Elector,  but  without  the  consent  of 
the  patron,  the  University  of  Wittenberg,  which, 
however,  was  duly  notified.  They  then  altered 
the  form  of  the  service  and  destroyed  the  images 
in  their  church.  This  whole  proceeding  was  dis- 
pleasing to  Luther,  who,  in  his  sermons  and  writ- 
ings, let  it  be  clearly  seen  that  he  classed  the 

4  H.  Barge,  Andreas  Bodenstein  von  Karhtadt,  1905,  de- 
fends the  affirmative,  and  thinks  Carlstadt  is  to  be  re- 
garded as  the  hero  of  a  movement  among  the  laity  com- 
parable to  that  in  Calvinistic  churches  **nd  lands  and  that 
Luther  really  blocked  the  path  of  progress.  Boehmer, 
Luther  im  Lichte  der  neueren  Forschung,  cannot  find  any 
sign  of  "lay  Christianity,"  but  admires  the  wisdom  and  abil- 
ity Luther  displayed  in  bringing  order  out  of  confusion  and 
retaining  all  that  was  worth  while  of  the  recent  innovations. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          67 

events  at  Orlamund  with  the  more  violent  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Anabaptists  in  the  neighboring 
town  of  Alstedt.  Both  were  guided,  he  said,  by 
an  evil  spirit.  "Christ  and  His  Apostles  neither 
broke  down  churches  nor  destroyed  images,  but 
won  the  hearts  of  men  with  God's  Word,  and 
when  this  was  done  churches  and  images  fell  of 
themselves."5  Fortunately  there  has  been  pre- 
served a  very  dramatic  account  of  the  further 
proceedings  from  the  pen  of  one  of  Carlstadt's 
friends,6  which  tells  the  story  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  Orlamundians  and  enables  us  to 
understand  better  both  the  temper  of  the  inde- 
pendent congregation  and  Luther's  attitude  to- 
ward it. 

As  the  Orlamundians  felt  they  had  nothing  in 
common  with  the  Anabaptists,  and  had  even  ex- 
pressed their  disapproval  of  the  proceedings  in 
Alstedt  by  formally  breaking  off  all  connection 
with  that  congregation,  they  naturally  felt  ag- 
grieved at  Luther's  grouping  them  together,  and 
wrote  him  just  such  a  letter  as  might  be  expected 
from  simple  and  serious  people.  They  greet  him, 
in  the  first  place,  as  Christian  teacher  and  brother 
in  Christ,  then  after  stating  their  grievance  de- 
clare, "You  despise  all  persons  who  at  the  com- 
mand of  God  destroy  dumb  idols  and  heathenish 
images.  You  oppose  to  them  a  powerless  worldly- 

5WA,  xv,  219. 
6  WA,  xv,  341  ff. 


68          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

wise  and  inconsistent  argument  drawn  from  your 
own  brain,  and  not  founded  upon  Scripture.  But 
the  fact  that  you  so  publicly  censure  and  revile 
us,  who  are  members  of  Christ  adopted  by  the 
Father,  unheard  and  unconvicted,  proves  that 
you  yourself  are  no  member  of  this  true  Christ 
the  Son  of  God."  They  then  invite  him  to  visit 
them  in  order  to  hear  their  explanations,  and  con- 
clude with  a  fraternal  greeting. 

Luther,  who  was  in  the  neighboring  city  of 
Weimar  when  the  letter  reached  him,  sent  word 
by  the  messenger  that  he  would  come  shortly, 
with  the  result  that  the  villagers,  understanding 
him  to  mean  the  next  day,  prepared  food  and 
drink,  and  made  ready  a  cordial  welcome. 
Luther,  however,  did  not  arrive  until  a  few  days 
later,  and  coming  unexpectedly  found  the  people 
at  work  in  the  fields.  As  many  as  possible  of  the 
council  and  the  congregation  were  summoned, 
however,  and  did  him  what  honor  they  could. 
They  greeted  him  in  their  best  manner,  but  the 
writer  notes  that  Luther  retained  his  bonnet  on 
his  head  and  did  not  return  the  courtesy.  He 
informed  them  curtly  that  he  must  soon  be  off 
again  but  wished  to  speak  to  them  indoors.  So 
they  went  inside  and  sat  and  drank  while  more 
of  the  congregation  gathered.  After  a  little  while 
the  burgomaster  invited  him  to  preach  to  them, 
on  the  points  in  which  he  said  they  were  wrong, 
after  which  they  would  state  their  position. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          69 

Luther  refused,  saying  that  he  had  come  to  speak 
of  the  letter,  that  they  were  simple  people  who 
could  not  have  written  it,  and  asking  if  Carlstadt 
were  not  the  real  author.  This  they  denied,  say- 
ing he  had  had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  it. 
Thereupon  Luther  read  it  and  they  began  to  dis- 
cuss it  sentence  by  sentence,  the  individual  mem- 
bers of  the  congregation  answering  freely  and 
to  the  point.  When  Luther  objected  to  their 
having  chosen  Carlstadt  without  the  consent  of 
their  superiors  the  treasurer  answered,  "If  Carl- 
stadt is  not  our  pastor  then  Paul  teaches  wrongly 
and  your  books  must  also  be  wrong."  At  this 
point  Carlstadt  himself  entered  the  room  and  an 
interchange  of  words  between  him  and  Luther 
followed,  which  led  to  Luther's  declaring  that  he 
would  leave  immediately  if  Carlstadt  did  not  go. 
Carlstadt  yielded,  left  the  room  and  the  discus- 
sion was  continued. 

Luther  denied  that  he  had  ever  mentioned  the 
congregation  of  Orlamund  in  his  sermons  or 
writings,  to  which  the  secretary  answered  that 
he  had  lumped  them  together  with  the  fanatics 
of  Alstedt,  in  his  condemnation  of  all  those  that 
destroy  images.  And  to  Luther's  rejoinder  that 
he  had  spoken  generally  and  could  not  help  hit- 
ting them,  the  secretary  added:  "Then  you  have 
hit  us  unjustly  when  you  compare  us  to  the  fanat- 
ics." Luther  then  turned  to  the  general  form  of 
the  letter,  calling  it  an  inimical  letter  for  they  had 


70          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

omitted  his  proper  title,  and  after  greeting  him 
as  a  Christian  teacher  at  first,  damned  him  in  the 
middle.  On  their  showing  surprise  at  his  so  inter- 
preting it  he  burst  out  with  "If  I  had  not  known 
before  that  you  were  fanatics  I  do  now,  for  you 
burn  before  my  eyes  like  fire.  You  are  not  going 
to  eat  me,  are  you?"  Then  turning  to  the  main 
point  of  the  dispute  he  asked  where  the  Bible 
ordered  the  destruction  of  images.  This  was  an- 
swered with  assurance  by  one  of  the  members 
of  the  council:  "You  will  admit,  Doctor  and 
Brother,  that  Moses  is  an  exponent  of  the  ten 
commandments/'  "Yes,"  said  Luther.  "Well, 
it  is  written  in  the  ten  commandments  Thou  shall 
have  no  strange  gods,  and  in  the  exposition  which 
follows  Thou  shall  do  away  with  all  images  and 
have  none." 

The  rest  of  the  discussion  turned  on  this  point, 
Luther  arguing  that  only  images  used  for  idol- 
atrous purposes  were  meant,  the  villagers  that 
all  images  were  included.  A  copy  of  the  Bible 
was  brought  and  appropriate  passages  found  and 
read.  Luther  asked  for  the  passage  Deut.  iv,  19, 
"And  lest  thou  lift  up  thine  eyes  unto  heaven 
and  when  thou  seest  the  sun  and  the  moon  and 
the  stars,  even  all  the  host  of  heaven,  thou  be 
drawn  away  and  worship  them,"  and  then  in- 
quired, "Why  don't  you  remove  them,  too?"  But 
the  shoemaker  was  ready  with  an  answer,  "Be- 
cause the  stars  of  heaven  are  not  made  by  our 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          71 

hands,  and  hence  God  has  not  given  them  into 
our  power.  God  has  commanded  us  to  remove 
only  images  and  therefore  we  should  not  attempt 
to  do  it." 

As  no  agreement  could  be  reached  the  meeting 
broke  up  in  disorder,  Luther  again  complaining 
"You  have  damned  me"  and  the  shoemaker  an- 
swering "Yes,  and  you  will  be  damned,  I  hold 
you  and  any  one  like  you  to  be  damned  so  long 
as  he  speaks  against  God  and  God's  truth."  As 
Luther  hastened  to  his  carriage  they  called  after 
him  to  explain  his  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  for 
they  had  not  found  his  writings  satisfactory. 
Later  he  said  he  was  glad  to  have  escaped  with- 
out a  shower  of  stones  and  mud. 

One  gets  the  impression  in  reading  the  story 
that  these  villagers  were  serious  minded,  deter- 
mined men,  eager  for  instruction  and  capable  of 
learning,  excellent  material  altogether  for  a  coun- 
try church;  and  that  Luther  showed  little  or  no 
tact  in  handling  a  delicate  situation.  If  there 
had  been  any  chance  of  reconciliation  before,  it 
was  shattered  by  Luther's  analysis  of  the  situa- 
tion in  his  work  "Against  the  Heavenly  Proph- 
ets,"7 in  which,  not  altogether  in  keeping  with 
the  facts,  he  accuses  Carlstadt  of  forcing  himself 
upon  the  congregation  of  Orlamund8  and  inciting 
rebellion  against  the  prince  in  whose  territory  he 

1  WA,  xviii,  62. 

8  RE,  x,  73;  xxiii,  738. 


72          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

lived  and  by  whom  he  was  paid.  As  for  the  Orla- 
mundians  themselves  he  condemns  their  election 
of  their  pastor  because  they  were  moved  thereto 
by  Carlstadt,  and  also  because  the  pastor's  salary 
came  from  another  whom  they  therefore  should 
have  petitioned  in  the  first  place.  The  end  of  it 
all  was  that  Carlstadt  was  banished  from  the 
Elector's  dominions  and  Orlamund  received  a 
pastor  in  the  ordinary  way  of  patronage. 

Still  more  alarming  was  the  Anabaptist  move- 
ment, a  name  that  it  is  convenient  to  retain 
though  not  entirely  appropriate.  As  early  as 
1520,  Thomas  Miinzer,  whom  Luther  himself 
had  recommended  as  preacher  for  the  town  of 
Zwickau,  began  to  develop  ideas  that  threatened 
the  common  peace.  When  he  was  transferred 
a  little  later  to  Alstedt  he  continued  in  the  same 
way.  It  was  necessary,  he  said,  to  separate  the 
truly  faithful  from  the  mass  of  so-called  Chris- 
tians and  to  establish  them,  by  force  if  necessary, 
as  the  true  church  of  Christ.  He  claimed  for  his 
speaking  and  teaching  the  direct  inspiration  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  his  violence  in  the  pulpit 
bore  witness  to  his  own  faith  in  his  teachings  and 
claims.  This  faith  in  himself  and  a  crassly  literal 
interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  united  to  open 
the  door  to  many  strange  doctrines  and  strength- 
ened his  adherents  in  their  efforts  to  enforce  them. 
Infant  baptism  was  condemned,  as  was  all  learn- 
ing, for  God  reveals  His  truth  to  the  simple  and 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          73 

not  to  the  wise.  "The  laity  must  be  our  prelates 
and  pastors,"  said  Miinzer,9  commending  at  the 
same  time  a  certain  weaver  as  an  especially  in- 
spired interpreter  of  the  Scriptures.  The  truly 
faithful  were  gathered  into  bands  and  prepared 
to  meet  force  with  force.  The  civil  authorities 
were  condemned  and  defied.  A  neighboring 
shrine  and  cloister  was  pillaged  and  burned. 

Altogether  it  was  a  serious  state  of  affairs,  and 
the  non-interference  of  the  Elector  and  the  Duke 
of  Saxony  is  at  once  a  testimony  to  their  unwill- 
ingness to  interfere  with  preaching,  and  an  indi- 
cation of  the  power  of  the  new  movement.  For 
it  was  Luther  that  felt  himself  compelled  to  inter- 
vene and  whose  advice  was  followed  in  the  mat- 
ter. In  a  letter  addressed  to  the  Elector  and  the 
Duke  John10  he  shows  the  difference  between  his 
own  spirit  and  that  of  the  fanatics.  The  true 
Gospel  is  to  be  sped  only  by  the  preaching  of 
the  "Word  and  with  this  the  civil  authorities 
should  not  interfere.  "Your  grace  should  not 
interfere  with  the  preaching  of  the  Word.  Let 
them  preach  as  boldly  and  freely  as  they  will, 
whatever  they  can,  and  against  whom  they  will. 
For  as  I  have  said,  there  must  be  sects  and  the 
word  of  God  must  go  to  war  and  fight  ...  if 
they  have  the  right  spirit,  he  will  not  fear  us  and 
remain  the  victor.  If  we  have  the  right  spirit 

9  RE,  xiii,  558. 

10  WA,  xv,  210. 


74          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

he  will  not  fear  them  or  any  one  else.  Let  the 
spirits  fight  it  out  together.  If  some  are  led 
astray  thereby,  that's  all  right.  That  is  the  way 
with  all  battles — some  must  be  wounded  and 
fall."  But  when  it  comes  to  blows  or  even  the 
threat  of  force,  then  beyond  doubt  it  is  the  work 
of  the  devil  and  should  be  suppressed  by  the  civil 
authorities  who  are  appointed  by  God  to  keep 
peace  and  suppress  the  rebellious. 

Accordingly  the  Elector  did  intervene,  with  the 
result  that  Miinzer  saved  himself  for  the  present 
by  flight  to  Miihlhausen  where  he  continued  his 
activity  and  later  joined  hands  with  the  peasants 
in  their  rebellion.  How  great  his  following  was 
at  the  time  it  is  impossible  to  say.  But  as  his 
hearers  sometimes  numbered  as  many  as  two 
thousand,  as  the  town  council  of  Alstedt  and  even 
the  Elector's  representatives  were  among  his  fol- 
lowers, and  as  he  was  reputed  to  have  organized 
bands  of  the  faithful  in  some  thirty  neighboring 
places  with  which  he  was  in  contact  through  mes- 
sengers, the  fear  of  serious  trouble  was  well 
grounded. 

More  portentous,  however,  than  the  defection 
of  either  Carlstadt  or  Miinzer  was  the  uprising  of 
the  laboring  classes  known  as  the  Peasants'  War. 
These  poor  people  believed  they  had  just  ground 
of  complaints  against  the  land  owners.  Luther 
agreed  with  them  and  history  confirms  his  verdict. 
They  also  believed,  and  what  was  still  more  im- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          75 

portant,  others  believed  and  proclaimed  that  their 
revolt  was  in  keeping  with  the  principles  of 
Luther's  reform  and  indeed  one  of  its  direct  re- 
sults. We  can  almost  picture  to  ourselves  Luther 
himself  writing  their  first  petition: 

"First  it  is  our  humble  petition  and  desire,  and 
also  our  unanimous  will  and  resolve  that  in  the 
future  we  should  have  power  and  authority  so 
that  a  whole  community  should  itself  choose  and 
appoint  a  pastor;  and  also  power  to  dismiss  him 
when  he  conducts  himself  improperly.  The  pastor 
thus  chosen  should  teach  us  the  Gospel  purely  and 
simply  without  any  human  addition,  doctrine  or 
command.  For  by  constantly  preaching  the  true 
faith  we  will  be  led  to  beseech  God  for  His  grace, 
that  this  true  faith  may  be  planted  and  confirmed 
within  us.  For  if  His  grace  be  not  planted  within 
us  we  remain  flesh  and  blood  which  availeth  noth- 
ing; for  the  Scriptures  plainly  teach,  that  we  can 
come  to  God  only  through  the  true  faith,  and  only 
through  His  mercy  can  we  be  saved.  For  this  rea- 
son such  a  guide  and  pastor  is  necessary,  and  in 
this  fashion  grounded  upon  the  Scriptures." 

It  was  only  natural  that  they  should  turn  to 
Wittenberg  for  aid  and  that  Luther  should  adopt 
their  cause  in  principle  and  denounce  the  selfish 
arrogance  of  the  landlords.  In  an  "Admonition 
to  Peace"11  he  warns  the  nobility  that  the  demands 
of  the  peasants  are  just  and  should  be  granted, 

11 WA,  xviii,  279. 


76          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

otherwise  the  wrath  of  God  will  fall  upon  them 
either  at  the  hands  of  the  peasants  or  in  some 
other  way.  Similarly  he  warns  the  peasants  that 
though  their  demands  are  just  they  must  be  sub- 
missive to  the  authority  ordained  by  God  and  not 
use  force,  however  unjustly  abused  they  may  be. 
Both  nobility  and  peasants,  he  adds,  are  acting  in 
an  unchristian  manner  and  for  selfish,  unchristian 
ends,  and  both  are  advised  to  change  their  ways 
and  come  to  an  agreement.  But  when  this  advice 
was  unheeded  and  the  movement  grew  to  huge 
proportions  threatening  to  sweep  destructively 
over  all  Germany,  Luther  definitely  took  sides 
with  the  civil  authorities  as  those  appointed  by 
God  to  maintain  order,  and  urged  all  who  could 
to  prevent  the  spread  of  the  conflagration. 

The  peasants,  he  said,  many  times  over  deserve 
death  of  body  and  soul.  Not  a  devil  is  left  in  hell, 
but  all  are  in  the  peasants,  who  have  broken  their 
oath  of  allegiance,  rob  and  plunder  where  and 
what  they  will,  and  endeavor  to  cover  their  sins 
with  the  mantle  of  the  Gospel.  Therefore  "stab, 
beat  and  strangle  them,  whoever  can.  Dost  thou 
die  thyself  in  the  struggle,  happy  art  thou,  thou 
couldst  never  find  a  more  blessed  death.  For  thou 
diest  in  obedience  to  God's  word  and  command 
(Rom.  xiii)  and  in  the  service  of  love,  saving  thy 
neighbor  from  hell  and  the  devil's  hands."12  The 
result  was  that  the  peasants  were  suppressed  by 

12  WA,  xviii,  361. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          77 

arms  and  their  economic  and  legal  position  made 
even  worse  than  before. 

These  incidents  may  serve  to  indicate  how  it 
was  that  Luther  did  not  feel  the  people  were  suffi- 
ciently serious  with  their  Christianity  to  be  charged 
with  the  duties  of  church  discipline  and  congrega- 
tional management.  False  teachers  easily  led 
them  astray,  selfish  and  material  desires  domi- 
nated their  religious  views  and  they  could  not  be 
controlled  except  by  force.  Luther's  faith  in  "the 
common  man"  had  been  greatly  shaken  by  the 
uprising.  He  feared  unless  necessary  reforms 
were  made  that  another  such  rebellion  would 
break  out  or  God  visit  them  with  plague  for  their 
sins.13  At  the  same  time  there  was  no  one  with 
the  necessary  ecclesiastical  authority  to  under- 
take the  work.  The  Roman  bishops  showed  no 
inclination  to  do  so,  and  the  congregations  them- 
selves were  unfitted  for  the  task.  "From  the 
peasants  nothing  is  to  be  expected,"  he  writes, 
"and  there  is  such  a  lack  of  thankfulness  among 
the  people  for  the  Holy  Scriptures  that  undoubt- 
edly God  will  punish  us  with  a  plague  before 
long.  If  I  could  do  so  with  a  good  conscience  I 
would  let  them  remain  without  pastor  or  preacher 
to  live  like  the  pigs,  as  indeed  they  do.  There  is 
no  fear  of  God  nor  discipline  any  more,  and 
everyone  does  as  he  pleases  since  the  pope's  ban 
has  been  published.3 


"14 


13  WA,  xix,  486  ff. 

14  Letter  to  the  Elector,  DeWette,  iii,  135. 


78          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Matters  indeed  were  in  a  very  serious  condi- 
tion. The  old  sanctions  and  restraints  had  been 
removed  and  no  new  ones  had  taken  their  place. 
The  new  Gospel  had  caused  much  commotion  but 
had  brought  no  improvement  in  life  and  manners. 
Its  opponents,  including  Erasmus,  could  point  to 
it  as  the  source  from  which  had  sprung  the  ex- 
cesses of  the  Anabaptists,  the  terrors  of  the  Peas- 
ants' War  and  the  general  immorality.  In  these 
circumstances  Luther  turned  to  the  civil  authori- 
ties though  not  without  again  reminding  himself 
and  them  that  the  rights  and  duties  of  the  civil 
ruler  in  respect  to  the  church  are  limited. 

Reviewing  the  whole  matter,  if  we  were  asked 
what  Luther's  views  of  church  government  and  of 
the  relation  of  church  and  state  were  during  these 
early  years,  we  should  have  to  say  that  he  had  no 
definite  and  fixed  opinions  on  the  subject.  That 
is  to  say,  there  was  no  one  form  of  church  govern- 
ment that  appeared  to  him  to  be  either  essential 
to  the  existence  of  the  church  or  exclusively 
proper  to  it.  All  his  thought  was  dominated  by 
the  idea  of  salvation  through  faith  in  Christ  and 
the  desire  to  proclaim  it  to  his  fellow  countrymen. 
To  this  end  he  worked  unweariedly  on  the  trans- 
lation of  the  Bible,  the  preparation  of  a  catechism 
and  preaching  the  Word.15  If  these  were  allowed 

15  Luther  described  his  own  attitude  in  a  sermon  delivered 
on  December  8,  1523.  As  reported  by  Rorer  he  said: 
"Quare  nee  ego  bin  keck  quicquam  in  der  Chris  tenheit  an- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          79 

free  play  he  believed  everything  else  would  fall 
into  line.  Anything  that  obstructed  the  Gospel, 
no  matter  whence  it  came,  was  reprehensible  and 
unlawful  and  not  to  be  tolerated;  but  disobe- 
dience to  secular  authority  should  never  take  the 
form  of  forceful  opposition.  And  similarly  any 
one  that  could  further  the  cause  of  the  Gospel  in 
any  way  was  bound  by  the  law  of  God  to  do  so, 
by  all  the  means  in  his  power,  but  in  this  case  also 
force  might  not  be  used. 

It  was  a  reformation  of  doctrine  that  he  desired 
and  not  a  reconstruction  of  the  church.  He  con- 
templates without  disapproval  a  reform  within 
the  church  which  shall  not  disturb  the  existing 
organization  with  its  pope,  bishops  and  priests; 
he  calls  on  secular  rulers  to  use  their  authority  in 
purging  the  church  and  society  and  in  providing 
suitable  preachers;  and  he  defends  the  right  of 
individual  Christians  to  associate  themselves  in 
congregation  having  power  to  judge  doctrine, 
appoint  and  dismiss  preachers  and  other  officers, 
exercise  discipline  and  generally  to  conduct  the 
affairs  of  the  congregation.  He  seems  to  have 
held  the  view  that  these  three,  the  ecclesiastical 
hierarchy,  stripped  of  course  of  its  priestly  char- 
acter, the  civil  rulers  and  the  individual  con- 
gregations and  Christians  might  cooperate  in 

zurichten.  Certus  sum  me  del  verbum  habere  et  praedicare 
et  vocatum  esse,  sed  quicquam  statuere  formido/'  etc.  WA, 
xi,  210. 


80          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Christian  love  and  harmony,  as  indeed  they  might 
in  heaven  but  nowhere  else.  All  of  which  is  sim- 
ply saying  in  other  words  that  Luther  was  a 
preacher  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  and  not  an 
ecclesiastical  statesman.  He  regarded  organiza- 
tion and  forms  as  necessary,  but  he  did  not  think 
them  of  primary  importance.  Moreover,  he  was 
not  a  systematic  thinker.  He  attacked  each  prob- 
lem by  itself  as  it  was  presented  to  him.  All  his 
writings  are  occasional.  He  did  not  attempt  to 
formulate  even  his  theology,  but  wondered  at 
Melancthon's  superior  ability  at  this  kind  of  work. 
And  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  outward  form 
and  government  of  the  church,  his  utterances  are 
scattered,  unrelated  and,  contemplated  from  the 
vantage  ground  of  four  centuries,  not  entirely 
consistent  either  with  one  another  or  with  his 
actions.16 

16  Professor  Drews,  Entsprach  das  StaatsJcirchentum  dem 
Ideale  Luthers,  1908,  in  combatting  Rieker's  thesis  en- 
deavors to  show  that  Luther,  although  he  did  at  first  appeal 
to  the  princes  to  reform  the  church,  did  so  with  the  as- 
sumption that  the  princes  were,  or  would  be,  serious  minded, 
faithful  Christians,  and  that  when  he  was  enlightened  as 
to  their  character  he  turned  to  the  individual  faithful  Chris- 
tians and  congregations  of  true  believers,  as  in  the  case  of 
Leisnig.  In  this  Professor  Drews  has  not  been  successful. 
It  is  comparatively  easy  to  show  that  Luther  from  the  be- 
ginning was  aware  of  the  great  number  of  hypocrites  or 
false  Christians  among  the  nominal  church  meiabers,  and 
that  in  planning  reformation  and  reconstruction  he  expected 
assistance  from  only  the  true  believers,  whether  prince  or 
peasant.  But  to  say  that  he  looked  first  to  the  rulers  and 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          81 

It  is  therefore  quite  true,  as  is  frequently  said, 
that  Luther  committed  his  church  to  no  one 
theory  of  organization  or  government,  but  laid 
its  foundation  so  broadly  that  it  can  accommodate 
itself  in  accordance  with  its  principles  to  every 
system.  At  the  same  time,  this  is  not  the  whole 
truth,  for  besides  those  passages  in  Luther's 
writings  which  free  his  church  from  slavery  to 
form  there  is  a  steady  current  of  thought  running 
through  his  writings  and  becoming  more  defined 
as  we  approach  the  decisive  year  of  1526,  and  con- 
tinuing later,  to  the  effect  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
priesthood  of  believers  should  find  expression  in 
the  outward  organization  of  the  church.  In  mat- 
ters pertaining  to  doctrine,  preaching  and  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments,  to  faith  and 
Christian  love,  all  true  Christians  have  inalienable 
and  indefeasible  rights  and  duties,  which  they 
share  equally.  They  are  the  source  of  all  author- 
ity. Preachers  and  other  officers  are  to  be  elected, 
and  possess  power  only  because  and  so  far  as  it  is 

afterward  to  the  people  is  to  misunderstand  him  funda- 
mentally. At  the  same  time,  and  in  the  same  writing  in 
which  he  appealed  to  the  nobility,  he  showed  that  he  had 
the  self-governing  congregation  in  mind,  and  a  few  years 
later  when  he  was  bending  every  effort  to  convert  the  minds 
of  the  people  and  monks  of  Wittenberg  from  the  sacrificial 
mass  he  also  appealed  to  the  Elector  to  prohibit  it,  a  fact 
which  Drews  has  difficulty  in  reconciling  with  his  views 
(p.  88).  The  simple  fact  is  that  Luther  did  not  see  any 
inconsistency  in  appealing  to  both  prince  and  people  at  the 
same  time  to  purge  and  reform  the  church. 


82          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

delegated  to  them,  and  they  should  exercise  it  only 
with  the  consent  and  approval  of  the  congrega- 
tion. Within  the  congregation  a  line  should  be 
drawn  between  the  young  and  careless  on  the  one 
hand  and  the  serious  minded  Christians  on  the 
other — as  we  say  between  adherents  and  mem- 
bers. The  latter  should  be  enrolled  in  a  separate 
register  and  should  charge  themselves  or  be 
charged  with  the  oversight  of  the  welfare  of  the 
congregation,  the  education  of  the  young,  the 
disciplining  of  the  careless,  the  relief  of  poverty 
and  their  own  spiritual  growth. 

Luther  regarded  this  as  the  form  of  church 
government  which  was  the  natural  outgrowth  of 
his  principles  and  said  so  in  all  seriousness,  though 
at  the  same  time  confessing  that  it  was  impracti- 
cable then  on  account  of  the  lack  of  serious  minded 
Christians,  and  therefore  postponing  its  establish- 
ment until  the  people  were  ready  for  it.17  In  this 

17  His  conversation  with  Schwenckfeld  in  1525  reveals 
his  embarrassment.  Being  pressed  for  his  views  regarding 
the  establishment  of  discipline  in  the  churches  he  answered : 
"Yes,  my  dear  Caspar,  the  genuine  Christians  are  none  too 
common,  I  would  like  to  see  two  of  them  together.  I  don't 
know  a  single  one/'  Zeitschrift  fur  Kirchengeschichte,  xiii, 
554,  quoted  by  Drews,  63.  Two  years  later  he  thinks  that 
the  church  visitation  ordered  by  the  Elector  will  lead  to 
the  establishment  of  such  congregations.  In  a  letter  to 
Nicolaus  Hausmann  he  writes  that  the  Elector  "velle  matu- 
r&re  visitationem  parochiarum  quod  ubi  factum  fuerit,  turn 
constitutis  ecclesiis  poterit  usus  excommunicationis  prae- 
sumi:  laceris  autem  ita  rebus  quid  praesumas?"  Quoted 
by  Drews,  66,  from  DeWette,  iii,  154;  Enders,  vi,  10. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          83 

he  proceeded  in  the  same  manner  and  on  the  same 
principle  as  in  the  abolition  of  the  elevation  of  the 
host,  the  use  of  the  Latin  mass,  the  removal  of 
images  and  other  things,  some  of  which  disap- 
peared during  his  life  time  and  some  later.  But 
there  have  been  few  and  unsuccessful  attempts  to 
give  to  the  individual  Christians  their  due  share 
in  the  government  of  his  church  or  to  the  congre- 
gation the  management  of  its  own  affairs.  This 
is  one  of  the  matters  in  which  Lutheranism  parts 
company  with  Calvinism,  for  it  cannot  have  es- 
caped notice  that  what  Luther  despaired  of  estab- 
lishing in  Germany,  John  Calvin  did  establish  in 
Geneva,  and  his  followers  carried  to  France,  Hol- 
land, England,  Scotland  and  America. 

It  is  perhaps  a  thankless  task  to  inquire  whether 
Luther  could  have  carried  through  this  part  of 
his  reform.  But  though  no  definite  answer  may 
be  given  and  Von  Bezold  assures  us  that  not  even 
Calvin  himself  could  have  withstood  successfully 
the  current  moving  in  the  direction  of  absolutism 
in  the  German  states,18  there  are  several  things 
that  ought  to  be  said.  First  of  all  there  is  the 
universal  truth  enshrined  in  the  proverb  "strike 
when  the  iron  is  hot."  There  is  no  doubt  that 
much  more  could  have  been  accomplished  when 
the  glow  of  the  early  enthusiasm  of  the  Re- 
formation was  upon  Germany  than  afterward. 
Luther  came  slowly  to  the  realization  of  the 

18  Kultur  der  Gegenwart,  Teil  II,  Abteilung  V,  1,  p.  71. 


84          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

revolutionary  nature  of  the  idea  he  threw  broad- 
cast to  the  people  but  others  were  not  so  tardy. 
Princes  and  people  stood  ready,  more  ready 
than  he  seems  to  have  recognized,  to  put  it 
into  application  at  once.  Whatever  criticism  we 
may  level  at  Carlstadt  and  the  congregation  at 
Orlamund  they  were  certainly  right  in  thinking 
that  those  things  which  they  knew  by  experience 
to  be  tainted  with  idolatry  should  be  removed 
from  their  worship.  And  however  we  may  con- 
demn the  excesses  of  the  Anabaptists,  they  were 
certainly  justified  in  making  some  distinction  in 
their  organization  between  the  serious  minded 
Christians  and  the  mass  of  baptized  members  of 
the  church.  And  as  for  the  miserable  and  misused 
peasants,  when  they  quietly  dispersed  in  Switzer- 
land upon  some  concessions  being  made,  and  when 
those  on  Philip  of  Hesse's  lands  swore  willing  al- 
legiance to  him  at  the  same  time  as  their  brothers 
elsewhere  were  in  rebellion,  it  is  to  be  regretted 
Luther  should  have  taken  such  a  definite  stand 
with  the  princes  whom  he  rightly  condemned  as 
cruel  and  unjust,  and  thereby  have  lost  the  confi- 
dence of  the  lower  classes  and  his  own  faith  in 
them.  The  same  qualities  which  made  it  impossi- 
ble for  Luther  to  cooperate  with  other  leaders  like 
Carlstadt,  Zwingli  and  Schwenckfeld,  and  later 
drove  all  but  Melancthon  from  his  side,  prevented 
him  also  from  recognizing  the  good  characteristics 
of  the  common  people  and  entrusting  them  with 
self-government. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          85 

As  for  the  Protestant  princes  themselves,  it 
seems  more  than  likely  that  they  would  have  al- 
lowed themselves  to  be  guided  by  Luther  had  he 
wished  to  reconstruct  the  church  on  democratic 
lines.  As  Von  Bezold  says  "With  all  his  caution 
he  [Frederick  the  Wise]  would  perhaps  have  fol- 
lowed his  Doctor  Martin  on  the  way  of  a  radical 
ecclesiastical  transformation,  but  the  Reformer, 
filled  with  a  deep  seated  distrust  of  'Herr  Omnes,' 
which  was  intensified  by  his  experiences  with  the 
evangelical  radicalism,  soon  turned  from  his  orig- 
inal thoughts  of  congregational  self  govern- 
ment."19 Something  of  the  same  sort  may  be  said 
of  Duke  John  of  Saxony,  whose  long  forbearance 
toward  the  Anabaptists  testified  to  his  desire  not 
to  interfere  in  matters  of  the  church,  and  whose 
organization  of  the  church  of  Saxony  which  be- 
came normative  for  the  other  states  followed  the 
lines  suggested  by  Luther.  The  fact  is  that  the 
German  princes,  though  willing  to  interfere  in 
ecclesiastical  matters  when  need  demanded  it, 
were  accustomed  by  long  training  to  leave  such 
things  alone,  especially  those  that  related  to  the 
religious  side  of  the  church's  activities.  Albrecht 
of  Brandburg  undertook  the  control  of  the  church 
in  his  lands  with  the  words  "We  have  been  forced 
to  take  upon  us  a  strange  office,  namely,  that  of 
bishop."  The  attitude  of  Philip  of  Hesse  is  even 
more  enlightening.  This  prince,  who  appears  to 

19  Kultur  der  Gegenwart,  Teil  II,  Abteihmg  v,  1,  p.  70. 


86          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

have  understood  his  subjects  and  to  have  enjoyed 
their  confidence  to  a  degree  unusual  at  that  time, 
not  only  thought  a  democratic  form  of  govern- 
ment for  the  church  feasible,  but  also  took  steps  to 
inaugurate  it  at  the  first  opportunity,  being  dis- 
suaded from  putting  the  plan  into  operation  only 
by  Luther  himself.  When  in  addition  to  this  it  is 
remembered  that  the  Germans  were  not  unfitted 
for  self  government,  that  the  free  cities  had  long 
been  accustomed  to  manage  their  own  affairs,  and 
that  even  smaller  cities  and  towns  enjoyed  at  that 
time  a  greater  degree  of  self  govrnment  than  they 
did  later,  we  may  well  ponder  what  might  have 
been  the  result  had  Luther  retained  his  faith  in  the 
common  man  and  insisted  upon  the  immediate 
application  of  his  principles  to  the  organization 
of  his  church. 

The  principle  of  local  self-government  either  in 
church  or  state  is  not  easy  to  defend  in  face  of  the 
frequent  ludicrous  and  sometimes  serious  blunders 
of  the  common  man.  But  it  is  correct  theoreti- 
cally to  say  that  those  who  have  committed  the 
blunder  and  must  feel  the  consequences  in  their 
own  lives  are  most  apt  to  correct  it  and  to  avoid 
similar  mistakes  thereafter;  and  experience  has 
shown  that  when  men  have  approached  these 
duties  with  a  sense  of  responsibility  to  God  and 
their  fellow  men,  they  have  soon  fought  their  way 
through  the  first  difficulties  and  established 
churches,  municipalities  and  even  states  on  solid 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          87 

foundations,  and  arranged  for  their  continuance 
by  a  proper  training  of  their  children.  Luther 
knew  that  the  "spirits"  must  be  given  liberty  to 
fight,  but  by  postponing  organization  until  the 
battle  should  be  over  he  forfeited  for  his  church 
the  most  effective  weapon  of  defence  and  offence 
and  the  only  proper  school  of  discipline. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  ESTABLISHMENT  or  THE  TERRITORIAL 
SYSTEM 

When  Luther  definitely  put  behind  him  the 
hope  of  establishing  the  church  on  the  basis  of 
the  universal  priesthood  of  believers  and  their 
equality  of  rights  in  the  new  organization,  he 
turned,  though  reluctantly,  to  the  only  other  au- 
thority whose  divine  ordination  he  recognized, 
namely  the  civil  ruler.  This  does  not  mean  of 
course  that  the  secular  authorities  had  been  ex- 
cluded from  his  thought  before  this,  nor  on  the 
other  hand  that  it  was  his  intention  to  create  a 
caesaropapacy.  To  imagine  either  of  these  would 
be  to  ascribe  to  Luther  a  conception  of  church  and 
of  state  respectively  foreign  to  his  time.  His  pro- 
gram from  the  beginning  called  for  the  coopera- 
tion of  the  civil  authorities,  and  in  all  he  did  he 
sought  their  sanction  and  consent.  In  summoning 
the  princes  now  to  do  what  the  mass  of  the  people 
could  not  be  trusted  to  do,  he  was  merely  calling 
upon  one  section  of  the  church  to  act  for  the  whole. 
This  conception  of  the  rulers'  position  is  one  of 
the  peculiarities  of  the  legal  position  of  the  Lu- 
theran church,  and  has  given  rise  to  much  legal 

88 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          89 

quibbling.  For,  as  the  civil  ruler  was  not  called 
upon  to  govern  the  church  in  virtue  of  his  civil 
position,  but  as  a  Christian,  as  a  conspicuous  mem- 
ber of  the  church,  "praecipuum  membrum,"  was 
bound  to  use  and  actually  did  use  his  secular  au- 
thority in  its  service,  it  is  still  debated  whether 
his  authority  in  respect  to  the  church  belongs  to 
him  as  territorial  sovereign  or  is  part  of  the  per- 
sonal regalia.  Luther's  view  was  that  the  prince 
had  duties  toward  the  church  but  no  rights  over  it. 
Of  course  there  was  no  concealing  the  fact  that 
the  princes  had  actually  stepped  into  the  position 
of  the  bishops  and  exercised  episcopal  functions, 
and  the  name  "emergency  bishops"  given  to  them 
by  Luther  is  both  a  recognition  of  the  actual  state 
of  affairs  and  another  indication  that  he  regarded 
it  as  only  a  temporary  arrangement. 

It  would  be  tedious  and  unprofitable  to  trace  in 
detail  the  organization  of  the  church  and  its  sub- 
ordination to  the  state  in  Germany,  and  to  follow 
all  the  ramifications  of  the  system  in  the  several 
principalities  and  towns.  The  following  broad 
outline  will  be  sufficient  to  show  under  what  con- 
ditions the  Lutheran  church  was  called  upon  to 
do  its  work.  The  steps  in  the  organization  of  the 
church  were,  as  a  rule,  (1)  a  visitation  of  the 
churches,  (2)  the  appointment  of  superintend- 
ents, (3)  the  appointment  of  a  consistory  or  con- 
sistories. 

The  first  definite  steps  toward  a  general  visi- 


90          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tation  of  the  churches  in  Saxony  were  taken  only 
after  it  was  evident  that  nothing  in  the  way  of 
reform  was  to  be  expected  from  the  Roman  au- 
thorities, after  the  peasants'  uprising  had  exposed 
the  deep  rooted  unrest  among  the  lower  classes, 
and  its  suppression  had  rendered  them  antipathe- 
tic to  Luther's  ideas,  after  sufficient  evidence  was 
at  hand  to  show  the  material  dilapidation  of  the 
church  and  the  moral  degradation  of  the  people, 
and  after  the  Recess  of  Spires  (1526)  had  given 
the  princes  some  legal  justification  for  interfer- 
ence. Luther  saw  that  some  action  was  necessary 
to  preserve  society  from  a  repetition  of  the  hor- 
rors it  had  just  experienced,  to  bring  the  Gospel 
to  the  people  and  particularly  to  provide  the 
means  whereby  the  rising  generation  might  be 
trained  and  disciplined  whatever  their  elders 
might  do.  "The  parishes  are  suffering  griev- 
ously," he  says.  "Nobody  gives;  nobody  pays; 
offerings  and  altar  dues  have  fallen  off,  tithes 
are  either  not  paid  or  too  small.  The  common 
man  respects  neither  preacher  nor  pastor,  so 
that  unless  some  bold  regulation  is  made  for  the 
suitable  maintenance  of  the  parishes,  there  will 
soon  be  no  parsonages,  schools  nor  scholars  and 
God's  Word  and  worship  will  disappear."1 

In  this  distress,  as  "necessity  demands  it,"  he 
turned  to  the  civil  authoriy  because,  as  he  says, 
"it  is  the  duty  of  all  of  us,  but  especially  of  the 

1  DeWette,  iii,  39. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          91 

secular  authority,  above  all  things  ['fur  alien 
Dingen']  to  educate  the  poor  children  that  are 
daily  being  born  and  always  growing,  and  to  hold 
them  to  the  fear  of  God  and  discipline,  for  which 
schools  and  preachers  and  pastors  are  necessary. 
If  the  older  people  will  not  have  it,  let  them  con- 
tinue to  go  to  the  devil.  But  the  secular  authority 
is  at  fault  if  the  youth  are  neglected  and  undisci- 
plined."2 "To  be  sure  it  is  not  the  duty  of  the 
civil  ruler  to  preach  or  to  govern  in  spiritual  mat- 
ters" but  as  none  of  the  reformers  had  the  right 
to  undertake  it  and  the  Roman  authorities  would 
not,  therefore  the  secular  authority,  out  of  Chris- 
tian love,  for  God's  sake,  for  the  good  of  the  Gos- 
pel and  the  welfare  of  his  Christian  subjects  and 
to  prevent  dissension  and  rebellion  should  appoint 
a  commission  to  visit  the  churches  and  regulate 
their  affairs.  The  example  of  Constantine  in  call- 
ing the  Council  of  Nicea  to  dispose  of  the  Arian 
question  is  cited  to  prove  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
rulers  to  take  care  that  dissension,  conspiracy  and 
rebellion  do  not  find  a  lodgment  among  their 
subjects.8 

Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  Luther  and 
his  associates  regarded  such  action  of  the  civil 
ruler  as  extraordinary,  exceptional  and  beyond  his 
ordinary  jurisdiction.  Even  Rieker,  though  he 

2  DcWette,  iii,  IS 5  f. 

8  Luther's  fullest  discussion  of  the  matter  is  found  in  his 
preface  to  the  Fisitationsbuch,  1528. 


92          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

seeks  vainly,  here  as  elsewhere,  to  draw  a  line  be- 
tween the  purely  spiritual  offices  of  the  church, 
preaching  and  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments, and  its  other  interests,  is  forced  to  admit 
this.  Indeed  it  would  be  hard  to  find  a  better 
summary  of  the  situation  than  he  gives :  "Accord- 
ing to  the  reformers'  ideas  and  thought  visitation 
is  an  episcopal  duty  and  does  not  pertain  to  the 
civil  authority.  But  as  the  civil  ruler  is  a  member 
of  the  Christian  body,  in  case  of  neglect  of  duty 
on  the  part  of  the  .  .  .  bishops,  he  may  interfere 
in  an  extraordinary  and  representative  manner, 
and  do  that  which  he  is  not  ordinarily  and  prop- 
erly competent  to  do.  His  legal  justification  is 
given  by  'the  office  of  love  which  is  equally  im- 
posed upon  all  Christians'  and  he  is  the  more 
called  upon  to  exercise  it  because  as  'the  un- 
doubted civil  authority  ordained  by  God'  he  is  in 
duty  bound  more  than  all  other  Christians  to 
uphold  what  is  best  and  to  ward  off  trouble.  In 
this  way  is  explained  the  apparent  contradiction 
that  the  secular  authority  is  not  competent  to 
order  a  visitation  and  yet  the  Elector  is  asked  to 
do  so,  that  as  civil  ruler  the  Elector  is  not  bound 
to  visit  the  churches  and  yet  is  summoned  thereto 
by  Luther  as  'our  undoubted  secular  authority 
ordained  by  God.'  "4 

The  explanation,  of  course,  is  to  be  found  in 
Luther's  own  phrase  "Need  is  need  and  knows  no 

4  P.  157. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          93 

law."  Luther,  as  we  have  seen,  looked  forward 
to  a  time  when  the  members  of  the  church  should 
take  their  Christianity  seriously  and  assume,  of 
their  own  volition,  the  burdens  of  the  church.  In 
the  meantime,  however,  as  the  Roman  authorities 
refused  to  move,  as  he  could  not  find  the  proper 
persons  within  the  congregations  to  undertake  the 
task,  as  the  older  people  were  living  like  pigs  and 
must  be  left  to  go  their  way  to  hell,  something 
strenuous  must  be  done  to  train  the  rising  genera- 
tion for  the  task.  For  this  purpose  the  civil  ruler 
was  called  upon  to  act  temporarily,  but  only  tem- 
porarily, as  bishop,  as  emergency  bishop  to  use 
his  own  word,  until  such  time  as  the  people  would 
be  willing  to  assume  their  duties. 

The  first  visitation  was  undertaken  by  Duke 
John  in  1527  and  carried  through  by  commissions 
composed  partly  of  divines  and  partly  of  civil 
lawyers,  who  kept  in  touch  with  the  Duke  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  reformers  in  Wittenberg  on  the 
other.  The  condition  of  affairs  exposed  by  their 
inspection  could  hardly  have  been  worse.  A  few 
pastors  were  properly  housed  and  cared  for,  a 
few  were  preaching  the  Gospel  intelligently  and 
seriously.  But  generally  speaking  they  were  un- 
educated and  immoral,  living  in  almost  abject 
poverty  and  supplementing  the  slender  income 
they  received  from  the  church  by  keeping  taverns, 
exorcising  evil  spirits  or  other  means.  They  were 
unable  to  give  proper  instruction,  and  their  flocks 


94          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

suffered.  The  people  had  no  respect  for  their 
pastors,  and  little  or  no  knowledge  of  religion.  Of 
the  new  doctrine  they  had  only  the  vaguest  no- 
tions. The  buildings,  churches,  vicarages  and 
schools  were  commonly  neglected  and  badly  in 
need  of  repair,  and  there  were  no  funds  available 
for  rebuilding. 

Altogether,  the  situation  was  so  bad  that  it 
demanded  not  only  an  occasional  visitation  but 
permanent  supervision.  For  this  reason  the  com- 
missions were  not  everywhere  dissolved,  but  con- 
tinued as  a  sort  of  general  council  for  ecclesiastical 
affairs,  and  tried  men  were  appointed  under  the 
name  of  superintendents,  to  have  oversight  over 
local  districts.  With  this  loose  organization  mat- 
ters ran  on  for  several  years.  Melanchthon  pre- 
pared a  set  of  Instructions  for  Visitors5  which 
provided  materials  for  the  reformation  of  the 
church  services,  and  so  facilitated  the  work  of 
superintendents  and  pastors  alike.  Luther  was 
frequently  called  upon  for  advice,  and  the  Elector 
in  whose  name  and  by  whose  authority  everything 
was  done  was  the  court  of  final  resort. 

Before  long,  however,  it  became  evident  that 
the  many  things  included  in  ecclesiastical  affairs 
at  that  time  could  not  be  properly  handled  without 
a  permanent  standing  court  for  the  purpose. 
The  matter  of  marriage  may  illustrate  this,  for 
it  contributed  as  much  as  any  one  thing  to  the 

5  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  i,  149  ff. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          95 

next  step  in  the  organization.  According  to  the 
Roman  theory  marriage  was  a  sacrament  and 
everything  pertaining  to  it  was  brought  into  the 
church  courts.  The  reformers  denied  the  sacra- 
mental character  of  the  bond  and  criticized  the 
Roman  regulations  concerning  it,  but  continued 
to  treat  it  and  all  relating  to  it  as  a  church  affair, 
following  the  Canon  Law  in  this  as  in  other 
things.  Obviously  difficulties  would  arise,  as  they 
did  arise,  far  beyond  the  power  of  the  local  pastor 
to  resolve  and  calling  for  adequate  legislation  and 
tribunals. 

This  and  other  similar  matters  led  to  the  estab- 
lishment, in  1539,  of  a  consistorial  court,  modelled 
after  the  Roman  Catholic  episcopal  court  and 
composed,  as  were  the  boards  of  visitors,  of  di- 
vines and  civil  lawyers.  It  was  appointed  of 
course  by  the  Elector,  and  immediately  respon- 
sible to  him;  and  although  it  was  not  at  first  in- 
tended to  do  so,  it  soon  supplanted  the  boards  of 
visitors  and  became  the  supreme  court  of  the 
church  in  the  district  assigned  to  it.6 

It  goes  without  saying  that  where  there  were 
so  many  political  units  each  of  which  was  com- 
pletely independent  of  the  others  in  ecclesiastical 
matters,  the  development  was  not  everywhere  uni- 
form, nor  the  machinery  of  church  government 
the  same.  The  Wittenberg  consistory  was  cre- 
ated in  1589,  that  of  Hesse  in  1610  and  the  one  in 

6  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  i,  55  ff,  200  ff. 


96          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Waldeck  as  late  as  1676.  But  the  underlying 
general  principles  were  everywhere  the  same, 
namely,  the  supremacy  of  the  prince  in  all  theo- 
logical and  ecclesiastical  matters.  With  this 
definitely  settled  it  was  of  lesser  importance  that 
at  one  time  and  place  he  acted  through  consis- 
tories, at  another  through  the  superintendents,  at 
another  through  special  commissions  or  the  regu- 
lar political  channels. 

It  is  true  that  sporadic  attempts  were  made  to 
preserve  the  Lutheran  principle  of  the  equality 
of  all  Christians,  and  to  erect  churches  on  the 
broad  foundations  it  laid.  The  right  of  a  con- 
gregation to  call  its  own  pastor  was  not  forgotten, 
nor  indeed  could  it  be,  for  it  had  been  incorporated 
in  the  creeds  of  the  church,7  but  save  in  very  rare 
instances  the  people  were  allowed  neither  a  posi- 
tive part  in  the  choice,  nor  even  the  veto.  Patron- 
age continued  as  in  earlier  times  subject  only  to 
the  will  of  the  prince  or  his  subordinate  officials. 
The  same  is  true  of  church  discipline  which  was 
constantly  mentioned  by  the  reformers,  quoting 
the  Gospels,  Matt,  xviii,  and  St.  Paul,  1  Cor.  v, 
as  belonging  to  the  whole  congregation,  but  which 
in  the  new  order  fell  to  the  local  pastor,  or  more 
generally  was  reserved  for  the  superintendent  or 
other  officials,  even  for  the  prince  himself. 

In  the  towns,  both  the  free  imperial  cities  and 

7  E.  g.  in  the  Appendix  to  the  Smalcald  Articles,  Part  II. 
Book  of  Concord,  p.  341. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          97 

the  lesser  municipalities,  there  was  more  liberty. 
The  town  fathers  occupied  the  place  of  civil  au- 
thority, and  carried  their  political  ideas  into 
church  matters.  But  here  too  the  tendency  was 
to  place  the  authority  in  the  hands  of  the  council 
rather  than  to  organize  the  people  into  a  congre- 
gation with  power  over  its  own  affairs. 

In  1526  Johann  Brenz,  who  later  became  fa- 
mous in  Lutheran  theological  circles,  prepared  for 
the  town  of  Hall  a  constitution  of  the  church 
which  made  the  congregation  completely  inde- 
pendent of  the  city  fathers.  A  number  of  honor- 
able men  were  to  be  elected  elders  (presbyters), 
and  one  of  them  pastor  (episcopus).  These  act- 
ing for  and  with  the  congregation  were  charged 
with  the  duty  of  caring  for  preaching,  the  admin- 
istration of  the  sacraments,  and  church  discipline, 
which  was  to  be  patterned  after  Christ's  directions 
in  Matt,  xviii.  Cooperation  with  other  congrega- 
tions was  to  be  effected  by  delegates  meeting  to- 
gether in  council.  Unfortunately,  however,  we 
do  not  know  that  this  plan  was  even  tried,  and  a 
little  later  we  find  Brenz  himself  opposing  the 
establishment  of  a  like  system  in  Wiirttemberg.8 
Something  similar  was  attempted  in  Stralsund  in 
1525  and  in  Reutlingen  in  1526.9  In  the  city  of 
Ulm,  according  to  the  Ordinance  of  1531,  there 

8  Richter,    Geschichte   der   evangelischen   Kirchenverfas- 
sungt  32,  48  ff. 

9  Sehling,    Geschichte   der   protestantischen   Kirchenver- 
fastung,  30  f ;  Kirchenordnungen,  iv,  540. 


98          PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

were  to  be  periodical  gatherings  of  the  pastors  of 
the  several  churches  for  the  purpose  of  counsel 
and  mutual  improvement,  also  synods  to  which 
clergy  and  laymen  were  admited,  while  discipline 
was  committed  to  a  body  composed  of  four  mem- 
bers of  the  council,  two  of  the  clergy  and  two  from 
the  congregation.10 

A  very  good  example  of  the  conflict  of  the  two 
ideals  is  to  be  found  in  the  duchy  of  Hesse.  This 
little  principality,  as  we  have  seen,  was  prevented 
only  by  the  intervention  of  Luther  himself  from 
putting  into  operation  the  liberal  and  democratic 
constitution  prepared  at  the  Council  of  Homberg 
in  1526.  Following  this  the  welfare  of  the  church 
was  committeed  for  a  time  to  six  superintendents 
with  large  episcopal  powers.  But  in  the  year 
1539  the  former  ideas  again  came  to  the  front 
with  a  law  requiring  the  election  of  elders  in  every 
congregation.  Honorable  and  respected  mem- 
bers were  to  be  chosen  for  the  office,  some  by  the 
council  and  some  by  the  congregation,  and  all 
were  to  be  accepted  by  the  congregation.  They 
were  to  be  charged  with  the  oversight  of  all  things 
pertaining  to  the  congregational  life,  with  the 
proviso  that  in  exercising  discipline  they  should 
excommunicate  no  one  without  the  consent  of  the 
superintendent.  This  was  evidently  a  step  toward 
transferring  the  power  from  the  civil  ruler  to  the 
people  as  Luther  had  outlined  it  in  his  "German 

10Richter,  157. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY          99 

Mass."  It  was  therefore  only  natural  that  he 
should  approve  it  and  commend  it  to  other 
churches,  urging  "that  we  again  establish  among 
us  the  ancient  ordinance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which 
is  given  us  in  the  apostolic  writings,  and  prescribe 
for  the  ministers  of  the  Word  in  every  church, 
corresponding  to  the  number  of  its  members  be 
they  many  or  few,  certain  presbyters,  that  is  el- 
ders— the  wisest,  most  modest,  most  zealous  and 
most  pious  in  the  Lord."11  The  clergy  of  Alber- 
tine  Saxony  too  were  encouraged  to  demand 
the  establishment  of  such  a  council  of  elders  in 
every  municipal  church  (not  in  country  churches) , 
basing  their  contention  as  did  Luther  before 
them  upon  the  example  of  the  early  Christian 
congregations.12 

But  neither  in  Saxony  nor  in  Hesse  could  the 
two  incompatible  regimes  exist  together.  In 
Saxony  where  they  were  opposed  by  George  of 
Anhalt,  who  was  at  once  bishop  and  prince,  the 
clergy  were  content  to  drop  the  matter  "for 
the  present"  as  they  said,  and  in  Hesse,  although 
the  elders  were  retained  and  even  divided  after 
the  Calvinistic  manner  into  "teaching"  and  "rul- 

11  Quoted  RE,  xvi,  9.     See  also  Luther's  letter  to  Anton 
Lauterbach,  April  2,  1543,  DeWette,  v,  551,  "You  would 
do  a  good  thing  and  give  me  much  pleasure,  if  you  could 
again    introduce    the   ban    (discipline),    after    the    manner 
and  example  of  the  earliest  churches.     But  the  undertaking 
would  give  great  offence  and  annoyance  to  the  young  gen- 
tlemen of  the  court  for  they  are  unaccustomed  to  discipline." 

12  Sehling,  Geschichte,  31  f. 


100        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

ing"  elders  in  1566,  the  synod  of  1568  composed 
of  the  superintendents,  representatives  of  the 
clergy  and  of  Marburg  University,  and  delegates 
of  the  civil  authorities  had  little  resemblance  to  a 
representative  body  of  the  whole  church,  and  by 
1610  the  popular  element  had  disappeared  to  such 
an  extent  that  the  consistorial  system  was  estab- 
lished. The  only  element  of  popular  control  that 
remained  was  the  right  of  the  congregations  in 
one  section  of  the  country  to  a  share  in  the  exer- 
cise of  discipline.13 

From  these  examples  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  "the  introduction  of  the  lay  element  into  the 
organism  of  the  church  and  indeed  its  elevation 
to  a  controlling  position  [is  a]  genuinely  Lu- 
theran idea,"14  and  did  not  yield  without  a  strug- 
gle. The  writings  of  the  reformers  themselves, 
the  early  church  constitutions,  and  the  later  con- 
flicts with  the  civil  authorities  all  bear  witness  to 
this  effect.  But  there  was  also  another  source, 
from  which  the  same  principles  were  derived  and 
from  which  they  spread  in  all  directions,  clashing 
with  the  hierarchical  church  of  Rome  on  the  one 
hand  and  with  the  state  establishment  of  Luther- 
anism  on  the  other.  This  of  course  was  Switzer- 
land, where  the  implications  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
universal  priesthood  were  as  clearly  recognized  as 
in  Wittenberg  and  where  the  representative  char- 

18Richter,  Geschichte,  183  ff. 
14  Sehling,  Geschichte,  32. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY    V  101 

of  the  political  institutions  mack  its: appli- 
cation, if  not  inevitable,  at  least  much  less  difficult 
than  in  imperial  Germany.  It  is  true  that  at  first 
there  was  the  same  commingling  of  the  political 
and  the  ecclesiastical  that  we  have  observed  in 
some  German  towns,  but  it  was  never  forgotten 
in  Switzerland  that  the  town  councillors  derived 
their  authority  in  ecclesiastical  matters  from  their 
election  by  members  of  the  Christian  community. 
Moreover,  as  the  work  of  the  Reformation  devel- 
oped and  the  issue  became  more  clear,  John 
Calvin  vindicated  for  the  church  in  Geneva,  and 
for  all  the  churches  that  came  under  his  influence 
later,  the  right  of  the  church  as  distinct  from  the 
civil  authority  to  exercise  its  own  spiritual  disci- 
pline and  to  debar  sinners  from  its  communion, 
and  at  the  same  time  gave  it  a  constitution  accord- 
ing to  which  the  ultimate  authority  was  vested  in 
the  people,  the  government  entrusted  to  a  com- 
mittee of  the  best  of  them,  and  in  which  the  church 
courts  were  composed  of  peers  who  took  counsel 
together  on  equal  terms  and  without  the  admis- 
sion of  any  external  authority  either  ecclesiastical 
or  political. 

The  influence  of  the  Swiss  Reformation  was 
felt  in  the  southwestern  part  of  Germany,  the 
valley  of  the  Rhine,  and  also  farther  east,  but  so 
similar  are  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  two 
movements  in  respect  to  the  liberty  of  Christians 
and  their  position  in  the  church  that  it  is  fre- 


102        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 


i  :•':  .^^ntLy;diffic'«ilt;if  not  impossible  to  say  whether 
this  or  that  constitution  in  the  earlier  years  sprang 
from  a  Lutheran  or  a  Swiss  source. 

Unfortunately,  however,  the  theological  differ- 
ences that  soon  parted  Luther  from  Zwingli  and 
were  continued  after  their  death  as  between  Lu- 
therans and  Calvinists  were  carried  over  into  the 
sphere  of  church  government,  with  the  result  that 
anything  partaking  of  the  nature  of  a  democratic 
organization  was  dubbed  Calvinism  and  thereby 
condemned ;  and  on  the  other  hand  the  consistorial 
system  with  its  subordination  to  the  civil  authority 
obtained  a  new  commendation  as  being  the  gen- 
uine and  truly  Lutheran  form.  Accordingly 
when  in  Wiirttemberg,  after  a  vain  attempt  to  or- 
ganize the  lower  orders  after  the  Calvinistic  man- 
ner in  1547,  the  consistorial  system  was  carried 
to  completion  in  the  graduated  courts  of  superin- 
tendents, general  superintendents,  church  council 
and  sovereign  in  1559,  ardent  Lutheran  divines 
like  Jacob  Andrea  successfully  advocated  the 
establishment  of  a  similar  system  in  Brunswick 
(1569),  Electoral  Saxony  (1580)  and  elsewhere 
in  the  interests  of  orthodox  Lutheranism.15 
Thus  a  new,  unwarranted  and  factitious  argu- 
ment was  added  to  the  forces  already  making  for 
the  absolute  supremacy  of  the  prince  in  religious 
and  ecclesiastical  affairs. 

15  Richter,  Geschichte,  121  ff;  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen, 
130  ff,  359  ff.     Geschichte,  32. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        103 

With  this  step  was  concluded  the  organization 
of  the  Lutheran  church ;  and  we  may  pause  to  see 
what  it  meant.  In  the  first  place  it  is  to  be 
remembered  that  although  the  consistory  was 
regarded  as  an  ecclesiastical  court,  that  is  to  say, 
as  belonging  to  the  church  and  acting  in  the  ser- 
vice of  the  church,  it  was  entirely  the  creature  of 
the  civil  ruler.  As  Sehling  says,16  "What  was 
the  real  position  of  this  body?  Whose  will  called 
it  into  existence?  Whose  will  was  normative  for 
it?  Who  nominated  and  removed  its  members? 
Who  issued  the  instructions  and  the  ordinances 
governing  it?  The  territorial  ruler.  Is  it  then 
amiss  to  characterize  the  consistory  as  his  judi- 
catory  from  the  beginning?  To  be  sure  he  occu- 
pies the  place  not  because  of  hierarchical  superi- 
ority but  because  of  his  duty,  as  chief  member  of 
the  church,  to  care  for  the  purity  of  doctrine;  but 
this  explanation  is  unable  to  alter  the  naked 
facts."  In  other  words,  the  Lutheran  church  was 
surrendered  into  the  hand  of  the  civil  government 
and  as  Zorn  says,17  "The  very  thing  that  the  re- 
formers emphasized  so  strongly  in  opposition  to 
Catholic  church,  namely,  that  the  centralization 
of  ecclesiastical  authority  in  one  person  was  un- 
allowable, and  that  moreover  spiritual  and  secular 
matters  must  be  kept  separate  at  all  costs — this 

16  Geschichte,  18. 

17  Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchenrccht,  vol.  xii,  143,  quoted  by 
Rieker,  167. 


104        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

very  thing  was  soon  forgotten  and  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  territorial  church  government  the 
place  of  the  pope  was  occupied  by  the  prince, 
whose  administrative  organ  was  the  consistory, 
and  instead  of  spontaneous  activity  in  the  church 
a  church  government  was  established  which  was 
centralized  in  his  court." 

It  is  true  that  something  was  gained  by  the 
creation  of  a  special  court  for  ecclesiastical 
matters  instead  of  referring  them  to  the  ordi- 
nary departments  of  government.  Rieker18 
makes  much  of  this,  endeavoring  to  show  that 
this  and  nothing  more  than  this  was  demanded 
by  the  reformers,  and  that  it  actually  realized 
their  desire  for  a  separation  of  the  spiritual 
and  secular  governments.  To  this  it  is  only 
necessary  to  answer  that  the  consistory  cannot  be 
regarded  separately  from  the  prince  who  called 
it  into  being  and  upon  whose  pleasure  its  existence 
depended,  and  that  in  him,  if  not  in  the  consistory, 
was  to  be  found  that  commingling  of  the  two  regi- 
ments which  Luther  so  strongly  condemned.  The 
only  way  in  which  the  consistories  could  have  been 
made  conformable  to  .Luther's  teaching  on  the 
one  hand  and  to  civil  establishment  of  the  church 
on  the  other  would  have  been  an  arrangement 
whereby  the  church  courts  derived  their  authority 
from  and  were  responsible  to  the  whole  body  of 
Christians  and  were  then  recognized  or  acknowl- 

18  P.  168. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        105 

edged  by  the  civil  authority  in  some  such  way  as 
the  appointees  of  Rome  had  been  recognized  be- 
fore the  Reformation,  or  a  responsible  minister  is 
recognized  by  a  constitutional  monarch.  But  for 
a  German  prince  to  play  such  an  impersonal  part 
in  the  government  was  impossible  according  to 
both  the  theological  and  political  theories  of  the 
sixteenth  century. 

It  has  also  been  argued  that  the  independence 
of  the  consistory  was  safeguarded  by  the  circum- 
stance that  the  Bible  and  the  confessions  were  its 
ultimate  authorities  and  that  over  these  the  prince 
had  no  control.19  And  of  course  there  is  some 
truth  in  this.  The  recognition  of  the  Bible  as  the 
undoubted  word  of  God,  and  of  the  Confessions 
as  the  faithful  expressions  of  the  truth  therein 
contained,  prevented  much  arbitrary  legislation 
and  helped  to  ensure  to  the  people  such  doctrines 
and  practices  as  were  unequivocally  stated.  But 
besides  these  there  were  many  questions  of  inter- 
pretation involving  both  doctrine  and  usage 
which  required  settlement.  Indeed  it  was  because 
of  this  that  the  consistories  had  been  created ;  and 
to  say  that  they  were  independent  of  the  prince 
in  their  investigations  or  in  the  making  and  appli- 
cation of  laws  is  to  deny  the  plain  facts  of  history. 
Not  only  did  he  control  their  action  indirectly  by 
his  appointments  and  dismissals,  but  he  person- 
ally cooperated  with  them.  Nor  indeed  could  it  be 

19  Rieker,  70. 


106        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

otherwise,  according  to  the  legal  conception  of 
his  position.  The  imperial  diet  had  committed 
to  him  the  right  of  reforming  religion,  the  church 
had  taught  that  it  was  his  duty  to  guard  the  two 
tables  of  the  law  and  to  provide  true  doctrine  for 
his  subjects.  Looked  at  from  either  the  political 
or  the  ecclesiastical  standpoint  he  was  the  final 
authority,  and  he  had  no  rival.  He  was  as  truly 
head  of  the  church  as  of  the  state,  and  that  he 
himself  had  no  doubts  on  the  matter  is  evident 
from  his  reserving  for  his  own  consideration  the 
most  weighty  questions  and  sometimes  at  least 
presiding  in  the  consistorial  court.20 

There  were  three  quarters  from  which  effective 
opposition  to  this  monarchical  government  of  the 
church  might  have  been  expected:  from  the 
people  first  of  all,  who  had  been  called  to  the 
leadership  by  Luther  and  the  principles  of 
Protestantism;  from  the  clergy,  who  were  accus- 
tomed in  Roman  times  to  dictate  alike  to  people 
and  prince,  and  from  the  nobility,  who  in  the 
local  diets  shared  in  the  political  government  of 
the  principality.  But  from  the  people,  after  the 
suppression  of  the  Anabaptists  and  the  peasants 
and  their  rejection  by  Luther,  nothing  was  to  be 
expected,  and  nothing  was  heard  for  two  cen- 
turies. The  clergy  and  the  nobility  did  not  yield 
without  a  struggle. 

As  long  as  Luther  and  his  great  associates 

20  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  i,  230. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        107 

lived  and  as  long  as  the  traditions  of  Roman 
Catholic  times  retained  their  force,  the  new  power 
of  the  prince  was  neither  exercised  nor  felt.  The 
clergy  advised  and  the  prince  published  their 
advice,  in  the  form  of  enactments.  But  when 
Luther  and  Melanchthon  were  dead  and  the 
smaller  men  that  succeeded  them,  not  being  able 
to  agree,  gave  themselves  up  to  theological  dis- 
putes which  they  conducted  in  such  an  unchar- 
itable fashion  as  to  forfeit  much  of  the  respect 
due  to  their  position,  the  prince  was  forced  to 
form  his  own  judgment  and  to  realize  his  new 
responsibility  and  power.  It  was  only  by  his 
word  that  controverted  points  could  be  decided, 
the  disputants  silenced,  imprisoned  or  banished, 
and  peace  maintained  in  the  church.  Much  de- 
pended of  course  upon  his  personality  and  his 
disposition  toward  the  church  and  religion.  The 
Count  of  Henneberg,  for  instance,  was  very  much 
averse  at  first  to  setting  himself,  a  single  member 
of  the  church,  above  the  consistory,  and  allowed 
his  superintendent  to  dispute  his  right  to  make 
any  changes  in  church  ordinances  and  ceremon- 
ies.21 But  such  examples  are  rare.  Even  the 
Count  of  Henneberg  soon  changed  his  mind. 
The  claims  of  the  clergy  to  an  authoritative  place 
in  the  church  gradually  disappeared,  being  com- 
pletely overshadowed  by  the  better  grounded  and 
materially  defended  claims  of  the  princes. 

21  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  ii,  276  ff. 


108        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

In  Pomerania  their  influence  had  the  most  last- 
ing effect.  Here  the  clergy  were  charged  by  their 
Duke  with  the  reformation  of  doctrine,  ceremonial 
ond  other  matters  and  a  visitation  instituted.  In 
1543  they  declared  their  independence  of  him  by 
demanding  that  "the  powers  of  the  Synod  be  pre- 
scribed, that  only  clergy  be  admitted  thereto,  and 
that  if  the  Duke  send  delegates  to  the  Synod  the 
conclusions  shall  be  handed  them  at  the  end  of 
the  sitting  with  the  request  that  they  be  en- 
forced." The  idea  behind  this  was  evidently  that 
of  the  Canon  Law  of  earlier  times,  according  to 
which  the  civil  authority  as  advocatus  ecclesiae 
was  required  to  execute  the  decrees  of  the  church 
without  examining  or  formally  approving  them. 
The  same  attempt  to  retain  the  former  practice 
appears  in  the  request  of  1556  that  preachers 
and  servants  of  the  church  be  tried  in  clerical 
courts  for  both  ecclesiastical  and  civil  offences. 
The  clergy  were  not  able,  however,  to  maintain 
their  independence.  By  1563  they  were  com- 
plaining of  the  prince's  unwarranted  interfer- 
ence with  spiritual  matters  and  shortly  after  the 
end  of  the  century  their  power  passed  into  the 
hands  of  the  consistory  and  its  master,  the  civil 
ruler.22 

The  failure  of  this  and  other  attempts  to  con- 

22  Balthasar,  Sammlung  einiger  UrJcunden  zur  Pom- 
merschen  Kirchenhistorie  as  quoted  by  Richter,  Geschichte, 
123  ff.  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  iv,  317  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        109 

tinue  or  restore  the  hierarchical  system  of  Roman 
Catholic  times  is  to  be  accredited  partly  to  the 
impossibility  of  the  clergy  competing  with  the 
civil  ruler,  but  largely  also  to  the  fact  that  their 
claims  to  authority  had  no  legal  basis  either  ec- 
clesiastical or  political  and  were  moreover  in 
direct  contradiction  to  the  principles  of  Protest- 
antism. 

As  the  Lutheran  church,  both  at  home  and 
abroad,  has  occasionally  suffered  from  such  high- 
churchism  it  is  worth  while  to  quote  what  Pro- 
fessor Richter  says  of  this  incident.23  "It  is  a 
universal  fact  that  government  by  the  clergy, 
whenever  and  wherever  it  has  developed,  has 
been  able  to  persist  for  only  a  short  time  and  in 
the  face  of  great  and  serious  objections.  This 
phenomenon  is  not  to  be  explained,  as  some  even 
outside  the  church  have  attempted,  by  the  lack 
of  faith  of  the  time,  but  its  real  reason  is  that 
government  by  the  clergy  is  itself  in  contradic- 
tion with  the  principles  of  the  church.  In  the 
Roman  church  it  is  an  article  of  faith  that  the 
power  has  been  divinely  conferred  upon  a  cer- 
tain class,  and  hence  the  government  will  remain 
as  long  as  there  are  believers.  In  the  evangelical 
church,  on  the  contrary,  faith  has  nothing  to  do 
with  clerical  government,  and  hence  opposition 
has  always  broken  out  against  such  claims  by  the 
clergy.  ...  So  it  was  in  Pomerania,  where 

28  Geschichte,  127  f. 


110        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

there  appeared  earlier  than  anywhere  else  in 
Lutheran  circles,  as  far  as  I  know,  an  opposition 
based  upon  the  rights  of  the  church,  and  directed 
against  the  clergy  in  the  first  instance,  but  also 
against  the  prince.  In  1573  Pastor  Cruse  of 
Stralsund  published  a  number  of  theses  in  which 
he  declared  the  Pomeranian  church's  organiza- 
tion and  form  of  government  to  be  unchristian, 
papistical  and  devilish.  He  denied  that  the  office 
of  the  general  superintendent  existed  as  of  di- 
vine right.  Indeed,  he  went  so  far  as  to  say  that 
tenancy  of  the  office  or  obedience  to  it  was  incom- 
patible with  salvation.  The  right  to  call  pastors 
belonged  to  all  the  churches,  the  right  to  ordain 
belonged  to  the  civil  ruler.  The  establishment  of 
consistories  robbed  the  churches  of  their  freedom 
and  the  civil  government  of  its  authority  over 
pastors  and  matrimonial  matters.  Finally  he  re- 
garded it  as  idolatrous  to  say  that  it  was  well 
pleasing  to  God  to  have  uniform  usages  in  the 
churches.  No  authority  has  any  right  to  speak  in 
such  matters,  and  the  prince  may  not  do  more  than 
any  other  common  Christian.  Indeed,  as  the  Son 
of  God  is  the  sole  ruler,  Christian  princes  have 
no  right  to  give  orders  to  their  subjects  in  eccles- 
iastical affairs.  In  the  end  he  appeals  to  the 
nobles  by  whom  he  expected  an  alteration  would 
be  effected.  These  sentences,  in  which  are  to  be 
found  so  many  things  which  are  usually  ascribed 
to  a  much  later  time,  gave  the  synod  occasion  for 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        111 

earnest  deliberation  and  anxiety,  and  were  finally 
solemnly  condemned  in  1583.  It  was  character- 
istic that  the  clergy  in  doing  so  did  not  appeal  to 
their  own  divine  right  but  characterized  the  false 
teaching  of  the  accused  pastor  concerning  con- 
sistories, visitation  and  ceremonies  as  an  injury 
to  the  office  and  authority  of  the  Christian  prince 
and  the  Christian  ruler." 

That  the  clergy  should  rest  content  with  their 
subordinated  position  was  not  to  be  expected. 
And  especially  in  the  period  of  strife  between 
Lutheranism  and  Calvinism,  and  among  the  sev- 
eral factions  of  the  Lutheran  church,  there  was 
frequent  criticism  of  what  was  called  the  unjusti- 
fiable interference  of  the  prince  in  matters  of 
doctrine.  His  right  to  govern  the  church  in  ex- 
ternis  was  freely  recognized  but  over  against  it 
was  erected  the  claim  of  the  clergy  to  jurisdiction 
in  matters  pertaining  to  the  inner  life  of  the 
church.  The  memorial  of  the  clergy  of  Helm- 
stadt  in  the  following  century  may  serve  as  an 
example  of  this.  This  raises  the  question24 
"whether  the  civil  ruler  has  power,  by  virtue  of 
his  position  as  ecclesiastical  or  political  magis- 
trate, to  prescribe  of  himself  to  ministers  of  the 
Word  of  God,  in  general  or  particular,  how  they 
shall  conduct  themselves  or  declare  their  opin- 
ions in  the  pulpit  in  regard  to  the  content  or  form 
of  debated  points  of  theology,  or  how  they  shall 

24Richter,  Geschichte,  197. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

punish  sinners."  To  this  the  memorial  gave  a 
negative  answer  on  the  ground  that  the  position 
of  the  minister  is  of  equally  divine  authority  with 
that  of  the  prince.  "As  you  are  commanded  to 
bear  the  sword  and  exercise  political  government 
in  the  place  of  God,  so  also  the  ministers  of 
God's  Word  are  in  the  place  of  Christ,  and  in  his 
place  preach,  teach,  punish,  comfort  and  rebuke." 
For  this  reason  the  civil  ruler  ought  to  submit  to 
the  minister  of  the  Word  just  as  does  any  other 
common  Christian,  and  exercise  his  authority 
over  the  church,  not  in  his  own  person  but 
through  superintendents  and  consistories,  as  was 
done  in  the  Calvinistic  churches  and  was  required 
by  the  terms  of  the  treaty  of  peace.  Such  remon- 
strances serve  to  illuminate  the  conditions  in 
which  the  clergy  lived,  but  they  failed  to  have  any 
effect  upon  the  prevailing  system. 

The  only  other  potential  rivals  of  the  princes 
were  the  nobles  who,  as  might  be  expected,  con- 
tended for  a  share  of  the  powers  inherited  by  the 
civil  authority  from  the  Roman  church.  Organ- 
ized as  local  diets  they  were  better  prepared  to 
withstand  the  absolutistic  claims  of  the  prince, 
both  because  custom  allowed  them  a  voice  in  the 
government  and  particularly  because  their  con- 
sent was  necessary  to  the  imposition  of  taxes. 
Accordingly,  it  is  not  surprising  to  learn  that 
during  the  sixteenth  century  their  influence  in 
church  affairs  was  considerable,  though  of  course 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        113 

not  everywhere  equally  great.  They  ordered 
visitations  of  the  churches,  demanded  the  estab- 
lishment of  consistories,  criticized  the  ecclesias- 
tical regulations  of  the  prince  and  the  consis- 
tories, were  consulted  in  regard  to  new  ordi- 
nances, and  had  a  voice  in  the  election  of  bishops. 
Pastor  Cruse's  appeal  to  them  indicates  that  in 
his  estimation  they  would  be  found  willing  to 
uphold  the  genuine  Protestantism  of  Luther 
against  both  prince  and  clergy,  and  indeed  their 
action  elsewhere  might  justify  him  in  so  thinking, 
for  in  Anhalt,  Wiirttemberg,  Prussia  and  else- 
where they  successfully  resisted  innovations  sa- 
voring of  Calvinism.25 

The  struggle  in  Prussia  particularly  is  worthy 
of  more  than  passing  remark  because  out  of  it 
came  the  conciliatory  ecclesiastical  policy  of  the 
Hohenzollerns,  which  was  destined  to  play  a 
large  part  in  German  lands  after  Saxony  had 
been  succeeded  by  her  northern  neighbor  as  the 
champion  of  Protestantism.  Prussia  had  been 

25  Sehling,  Geschichte,  20,  and  literature  cited  there. 
Also  the  article  Verbesserungspuncte,  die  hessische,  in  RE, 
xx,  493.  The  following  incident  reveals  the  part  played 
by  prince  and  nobles  respectively  in  Pomerania.  When 
the  diet  met  in  1534  to  consider  the  introduction  of  Prot- 
estantism, the  nobles  demanded  that  the  property  of  the 
church  should  be  used  for  the  support  of  indigent  and  aged 
nobles.  The  prince  insisted  that  it  should  be  used  for  the 
establishment  of  schools.  The  nobles  failing  to  gain  their 
point  withdrew  from  the  diet.  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen, 
iv,  85. 


114        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

converted  to  Protestantism  by  the  efforts  of  Al- 
brecht  of  Hohenzollern,  grand-master  of  the 
Order  of  Teutonic  Knights.  This  chivalrous  or- 
der, composed  entirely  of  nobles  of  German  birth, 
after  serving  its  purpose  as  guardian  of  pilgrims 
to  the  Holy  Land  in  the  time  of  the  Crusades, 
transferred  its  activity  to  the  northeastern  boun- 
daries of  Germany  which  had  remained  as  yet 
outside  the  bounds  of  Christendom.  The  work 
of  conversion  or  rather  of  subjugation  was  suc- 
cessfully carried  out,  German  settlers  introduced 
to  mix  with  the  older  inhabitants  and  a  flourish- 
ing state  called  into  being.  In  the  beginning  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  however,  the  glory  of  the 
Order  had  departed,  its  rules  were  no  longer  en- 
forced, and  it  had  to  acknowledge  the  sovereignty 
of  the  King  of  Poland.  Success  had  paved  the 
way  to  wealth,  and  wealth  to  degeneration.  So 
notorious  was  its  condition  that  the  pope  ordered 
the  grand  master  to  cleanse  it  and  bring  it  to  a 
proper  regard  for  its  laws. 

It  was  while  he  was  pondering  the  perplexities 
of  his  problem  that  the  grand  master  first  met 
Luther  whose  name  and  fame  were  being  carried 
over  all  Germany.  To  his  request  for  advice  Lu- 
ther replied  that  he  should  give  up  Roman  Cath- 
olicism, transform  the  lands  of  the  Order  into  a 
duchy,  proclaim  himself  duke  and  marry  a  wife. 
The  grand  master  is  said  only  to  have  smiled  at 
the  time,  but  a  little  later  he  adopted  the  advice 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        115 

to  the  letter.  Most  of  the  other  knights  followed 
his  example,  at  least  in  the  matter  of  taking  lands 
and  wives,  and  so  became  the  ancestors  of  the 
Prussian  nobility  of  later  times,  to  whom  they 
committed  the  traditions  of  the  military  order 
from  which  they  sprang. 

Told  in  this  bald  fashion  it  might  appear  that 
religion  had  little  to  do  with  the  Protestantizing 
of  Prussia,  but  such  is  not  the  case.  There  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  the  seriousness  of  Albrecht's 
conversion  to  the  Lutheran  faith.  His  actions 
show  that  he  was  concerned  to  have  all  his  sub- 
jects enlightened  in  regard  to  it.  His  first 
church  ordinance  of  1525  recognized  the  right  of 
the  congregations  to  exercise  discipline  and  share 
in  calling  their  pastors.  He  ordered  church  visi- 
tations and  took  part  in  them  himself.  He  co- 
operated with  the  local  bishops,  who  had  accepted 
Protestantism  and  surrendered  their  civil  powers 
into  his  hands.  In  1530  he  announced  in  the 
preface  to  a  new  church  ordinance  that  he  was 
forced  by  the  neglected  condition  of  the  churches 
to  assume  "a  new  office  namely,  the  episcopal." 
He  provided  preachers  to  instruct  the  people  in 
the  "pure  Gospel,"  and  used  other  means  only  as 
supplementary.  He  established  secular  and  re- 
ligious schools  throughout  his  territories  and 
crowned  the  educational  system  with  the  Univer- 
sity of  Konigsberg  which  bears  his  name  (Al- 
bertina)  to  this  day.  In  the  year  1587  the  two 


116        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

episcopates  which  had  persisted  until  then  gave 
way  to  consistories,  and  so  the  last  step  was  taken 
in  bringing  the  duchy  into  line  with  the  other  gen- 
uinely Lutheran  lands.  In  this  way  Prussia  was 
won  for  Lutheranism  as  it  never  had  been  won 
for  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and  it  has  repaid 
the  debt  by  always  remaining  true  to  the  great 
Reformer. 

The  sister  state  of  Brandenburg  had  adopted 
the  principles  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation  only 
after  considerable  hesitation  and  even  then  had 
retained  many  of  the  ecclesiastical  earmarks  of  the 
Roman  church.  As  the  bitter  antagonism  toward 
Calvinism  which  characterized  the  Lutheran 
church  of  the  sixteenth  century  developed,  how- 
ever, it  became  thoroughly  imbued  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  new  church,  being  hardly  behind 
Saxony  in  its  condemnation  of  the  sister  Protes- 
tant church  and  of  Lutheran  heresies.  Osian- 
drianism  and  Philipism  were  suppressed,  the 
importation  of  Calvinistic  books  was  forbidden,  a 
body  of  doctrine  ( Corpus  doctrinae  Brandenbur- 
gicum,  1572)  published  which  gave  special  prom- 
inence to  Luther's  statement  that  Zwingli  and  all 
his  teachings  were  unchristian,  and  the  heirs  to 
the  throne  were  pledged  to  make  no  innovations 
in  the  matter  of  dogma.  The  zeal  behind  all  these 
measures  may  be  judged  by  the  prayer  of  the 
Chancellor  Distelmeyer:  "Fill  us,  O  God,  with 
the  hatred  of  Calvinism." 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        117 

While  matters  were  going  on  in  this  way  two 
things  of  prime  importance  occurred  early  in  the 
seventeenth  century.  By  a  failure  of  the  Prus- 
sian line,  Brandenburg  and  Prussia  were  united 
under  one  prince — and  this  prince  attempted  to 
impose  upon  his  subjects  the  Calvinistic  faith. 
John  Sigismund  when  a  child  had  been  trained 
in  the  strictest  Lutheranism,  and  pledged  by  his 
grandfather  to  maintain  it  as  then  established  in 
the  schools  and  churches  of  Brandenburg.  Un- 
der the  more  liberal  direction  of  his  father  his 
education  was  continued  in  Strassburg  and  Hei- 
delberg where  he  had  an  opportunity  of  becom- 
ing acquainted  with  the  Calvinistic  church  and 
observing  its  effects  in  the  upper  Rhine  country. 
He  was  there  convinced  that  Lutheranism  was 
only  a  halting  place  between  Roman  Catholicism 
and  true  Christianity,  and  that  in  Calvinism  were 
to  be  found  both  correct  doctrine  and  a  cultural 
power  lacking  in  the  religion  and  church  of  his 
home.  Accordingly  soon  after  his  accession  to 
the  throne  he  allowed  his  preference  to  be  known, 
at  first  quietly  and  almost  secretly,  and  then  with 
more  boldness.  He  found,  however,  little  sup- 
port among  his  people,  for  the  clergy,  nobility 
and  even  the  members  of  his  own  family,  at  least 
his  own  wife  and  daughters,  were  resolved  to  be 
true  to  their  own  church  and  to  prevent  if  possi- 
ble his  defection  from  it.  This  did  not  prevent 
him  from  taking  steps  toward  making  Calvinism 


118        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  faith  of  his  subjects.  Acting  within  what  was 
generally  regarded  as  his  legal  right  and  duty, 
the  jus  reformandi  religionem,  he  invited  Cal- 
vinistic  divines  from  the  Palatinate,  and  ap- 
pointed a  church  council  to  which  was  committed 
the  oversight  of  preaching,  teaching  and  the 
training  and  licensing  of  preachers.  At  the 
same  time  he  declared  almost  in  the  words  of 
Luther  that  the  conscience  could  not  be  forced 
and  that  he  had  no  intention  of  coercing  his  sub- 
jects until  they  had  had  an  opportunity  of  ac- 
quainting themselves  with  what  he  called  "Lu- 
theranism  purged  of  Papacy."  To  assist  them 
to  a  better  knowledge  he  himself  prepared  a  con- 
fession of  faith  dealing  with  the  controverted 
points  of  doctrine. 

The  first  to  oppose  this  program  were  Lu- 
theran ministers  who  in  the  pulpit  and  press 
loudly  denounced  Calvinism  in  general  and  the 
new  regulations  in  particular.  The  Elector 
answered  by  taking  steps  to  have  the  chief  of- 
fenders arrested,  and  they  escaped  this  humilia- 
tion only  by  the  assistance  of  the  Electress  Anna. 
True  to  his  expressed  wish  that  the  differences  be 
debated  freely  the  Elector  also  invited  the  Lu- 
theran clergy  to  meet  the  Calvinistic  divines.  This 
the  former  endeavored  in  every  way  to  avoid,  and 
when  brought  to  the  debating  hall  almost  by 
force,  excused  themselves  from  speaking  on  the 
ground  that  the  subject  matter  was  not  suitable 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        119 

for  discussion  in  the  vernacular,  and  that  as  the 
Elector  had  imported  Calvinistic  divines  he 
should  also  allow  foreign  Lutheran  scholars  to 
be  summoned.  From  which  it  is  evident  that  the 
clergy  did  not  feel  equal  to  the  task  of  opposing 
the  prince. 

With  the  nobility,  however,  it  was  otherwise. 
Using  the  same  weapon  that  has  been  found 
effective  elsewhere  in  subjugating  recalcitrant 
rulers  they  refused  to  vote  supplies  until  the  old 
order  was  established.  In  Prussia  they  added  the 
accusation  that  any  alteration  in  the  faith  of  the 
country  was  a  violation  of  the  fundamental  law 
of  the  duchy.  In  the  end  the  Elector  was  forced 
to  yield,  contenting  himself  with  the  declaration 
that  he  would  neither  interfere  with  the  religious 
beliefs  of  his  subjects  nor  allow  them  to  interfere 
with  his.  The  cathedral  church  of  Berlin  re- 
mained Calvinistic  and  a  few  other  churches  of 
the  same  faith  appeared  in  the  neighborhood  of 
the  court,  but  the  country  generally  remained 
solidly  Lutheran.  As  for  the  Electress  Anna, 
she  died  protesting  her  hatred  of  Calvinism,  but 
a  minister  of  the  detested  faith  pronounced 
the  funeral  oration  and  utilized  the  occasion  to 
prove  that  Calvinism  is  the  only  true  form  of 
Christianity. 

In  this  way  a  form  of  toleration  was  intro- 
duced into,  or  rather  forced  upon  Brandenburg 
and  Prussia  early  in  the  seventeenth  century.  In 


120        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

this  way  too  the  Hohenzollerns  were  directed  to 
an  ecclesiastical  policy  of  conciliation  of  the  two 
great  branches  of  Protestantism,  which  brought 
them  into  contact  with  the  reformed  states  in  the 
valley  of  the  Rhine  and  beyond,  as  well  as  the 
Lutheran  states  lying  at  their  doors,  and  so  pre- 
pared the  way  for  Prussia  to  become  the  conti- 
nental champion  of  Protestantism.  Nor  should 
we  neglect  another  result,  namely,  that  by  John 
Sigismund's  conversion  to  Calvinism  the  Lu- 
theran churches  of  Brandenburg  and  Prussia 
were  forced  to  accept  as  their  supreme  ruler  a 
prince  of  another  faith.  The  Lutheran  theory  of 
the  prince's  right  to  rule  in  virtue  of  his  being  an 
eminent  member  of  the  church  therefore  fell  to 
the  ground. 

It  would  be  wrong  to  conclude  from  this  and 
similar  conflicts  in  which  the  prince  failed  to  gain 
his  ends  that  the  nobility  were  capable  in  them- 
selves of  offering  an  effective  opposition.  John 
Sigismund  was  not  restrained  by  them  but  by 
the  power  of  Luther's  name.  They  merely  gave 
expression  to  the  universal  will  against  which  the 
prince  in  spite  of  his  position  and  power  was  un- 
able to  make  headway.  As  spokesman  for  the 
people's  rights  they  were  able  to  gain  their  ends, 
but  not  when  acting  for  themselves.  They  had 
no  adequate  grounds  upon  which  to  base  their 
own  claims  nor  the  material  means  wherewith  to 
support  them.  Hence  they  too,  like  the  clergy, 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

disappeared  as  a  factor  in  the  government  of 
the  church  by  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century; 
and  the  Thirty  Years  War  deprived  them  of  any 
remnants  of  power,  political  or  ecclesiastical. 

The  elimination  of  the  clergy  and  lesser  nobles 
on  the  one  hand  and  the  harsh  repression  of  the 
masses  of  the  people  on  the  other  left  the  terri- 
torial ruler  without  a  rival  at  the  head  of  the 
church.  As  Sehling  truly  says,26  "The  territorial 
prince  was  absolute  ruler.  He  issued  the  ordi- 
nances for  the  church  as  his  own  regulations, 
ordinances  that  affected  every  branch  of  the 
church  life,  organization,  liturgies  and  doctrine. 
He  named  the  church  officials  down  to  the  pas- 
tors. He  appointed  the  officials  and  held  them 
to  their  work.  Visitations  were  made  in  his 
name,  their  results  reported  to  him  and  the  cor- 
responding necessary  orders  imparted  by  him 
and  enforced  by  his  own  commission,  the  next 
board  of  visitors  or  the  lower  officials.  All  com- 
plaints were  laid  before  him  and  decided  by  him. 
In  places  where  he  had  appointed  consistorial 
courts  appeals  were  sometimes  made  to  them,  and 
sometimes  over  their  heads  directly  to  him,  even 
in  questions  relating  to  marriage.  The  whole 
finance  system  of  the  church  was  conducted  in 
the  same  way.  All  petitions  for  improvement 
came  to  him  either  through  the  boards  of  visita- 
tion, or,  more  rarely  and  regularly,  through  the 

28  Geschichte,  20. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

superintendents,  and  were  decided  by  him.  He 
too  had  to  supply  the  requisite  moneys.  The 
disciplinary  power  over  the  preachers  lay  also 
with  him.  In  a  word,  the  whole  legal  life  of  the 
church  was  in  his  hands." 

Even  in  matters  of  doctrine  and  church  disci- 
pline, which  were  frequently  associated  in  the 
period  of  controversy  after  Luther's  death,  the 
prince  freely  interfered.     He  was  the  guardian 
of  true  doctrine,  and  this  could  not  be  protected 
except  by  physical  means.    But  as  he  had  little 
or  no  knowledge  of  theology  himself,  his  inter- 
vention was  often  hasty,  ill  judged  or  subject  to 
a  later  change  of  opinion.    An  excellent  illustra- 
tion is  afforded  by  the  action  of  the  Duke  in  Ern- 
estine Saxony,  who  under  the  influence  of  Flacius 
issued  as  authoritative  for  the  churches  of  his 
territory  a  condemnation  of  nine  new  heresies, 
1556.    A  little  later,  falling  under  the  influence 
of  those  imprisoned  for  heresy,  he  allied  himself 
with  them  and  when  Flacius  and  his  associates 
complained,  as  they  did  quite  forcibly  and  incon- 
sistently, of  his  usurping  the  place  of  Christ  in 
the  church,  banished  them,  forty  altogether,  from 
the  country.    To  add  to  the  confusion  a  change 
of  rulers  a  few  years  later  restored  the  strict 
Lutheranism  of  Flacius  to  the  authoritative  place 
and  most  of  the  exiles  to  their  former  positions. 
In  the  confusion  necessarily  attendant  upon  such 
measures  and  counter  measures,  when  a  man 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        123 

might  be  orthodox  today  and  a  heretic  tomorrow, 
it  is  no  wonder  that  the  defender  of  true  doctrine 
should  find  it  necessary  to  instruct  his  superin- 
tendent that  no  one  was  to  be  excommunicated 
without  his  consent.27  Luther  had  protested  vig- 
orously a  few  years  before  (1543)  when  Maurice 
of  Saxony  had  interfered  with  church  discipline,28 
complaining  that  whereas  before  the  Refor- 
mation "the  devil  had  injected  the  church  into 
politics  now  he  was  injecting  the  state  into  the 
church."  But  within  twenty  years  the  Duke  of 
Weimar  calmly  reserved  for  himself  every  case 
of  excommunication,  and  a  few  years  later  no  one 
apparently  doubted  the  prince's  right  to  govern 
in  this  as  in  every  other  department  of  the  church. 
Indeed  one  of  the  amazing  things  about  this  revo- 
lution is  the  speed  with  which  it  was  accom- 
plished. And  yet  after  all  there  is  no  reason  for 
surprise.  Had  Luther's  own  ideas  and  ideals 
been  consummated  within  the  same  space  of  time 
it  might  well  be  called  amazing,  but  what  was 
reaUy_accQmplished  was,  merely  _tke^transfe.r£nce 
of _  ecclesiastical  authority  f rom  one  man  to  an- 
other^ The  GeimaiLJprinc^MdJDecoi^^ 
episcopus^or  pope  injii^owiijtjerrit_oj!y,  as  was 
recognized  as  soon  as  the  people  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  comtemplate  what  had  been  done. 


27 


Setting,  Geschichte,  22. 

Letter  to  Gresser,  Oct.  22,  1543,  DeWette,  v.  596. 


CHAPTER  V 

THEORIES  AND  PRACTICE 

In  all  essentials,  the  legal  position  of  the  Lu- 
theran churches  and  of  the  Calvinistie  churches 
in  Lutheran  countries  has  remained  the  same 
throughout  the  centuries,  as  at  the  end  of  the 
sixteenth  century.  But  although  the  actual  con- 
dition has  not  changed,  the  theories  respecting  it 
have  altered  from  time  to  time,  yielding  to  modi- 
fications of  thought  in  respect  to  religion  and 
politics.  The  first  is  the  Episcopal  Theory. 

The  earliest  writers  to  treat  the  matter  syste- 
matically endeavored  to  justify  the  existing 
dominion  of  the  prince  out  of  divine  and  human 
law,  and  at  the  same  time  to  safeguard  the  free- 
dom of  the  church.  The  threefold  division  of  the 
church  into  status  ecclesiasticus  or  the  clergy, 
status  politicus  or  the  civil  authority,  and 
status  oeconomicus  or  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
laity,  a  division  that  antedates  the  Reformation 
and  had  been  appropriated  by  Luther,  was  re- 
tained and  formed  the  basis  upon  which  the  legal 
structure  was  erected.  Each  estate  was  appor- 
tioned its  own  particular  share  in  the  church  life 
with  the  result  that  to  the  civil  ruler  fell  the  duty 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

and  right  of  governing,  to  the  clergy  the  duty 
and  right  of  preaching,  administering  the  sacra- 
ments and  advising,  and  to  the  people  the  duty 
and  right  of  approving  and  acquiescing  in  the 
actions  of  their  superiors.  The  centre  of  gravity 
in  such  a  system  lay  of  course  in  the  civil  ruler 
whose  position  received  the  most  attention  and 
to  whom  the  others  were  related. 

It  was  assumed  in  the  first  place  that  the  ruler 
is  a  pious  Christian,  that  is  to  say,  in  the  words  of 
Luther,  that  he  is  a  "conspicuous  member"  of  the 
church.  This,  however,  was  not  now  regarded  as 
a  justification  of  his  interfering  in  ecclesiastical 
affairs  in  itself.  "To  the  magistrate,"  says  the 
theologian  Gerhard,1  "has  been  committed  by 
God  the  custody  of  the  divine  law,  to  which  be- 
longs not  only  the  second  table  of  the  Decalogue 
regarding  duties  to  one's  neighbor,  but  also  the 
first  table  regarding  the  worship  of  God  and  the 
public  exercise  of  the  same."  Similarly,  Rein- 
ginck2  the  jurist  declares  that  the  magistrate  pos- 
sesses his  ecclesiastical  rights  and  powers  "not  by 
virtue  of  any  papal  ordinance,  but  by  virtue  of 
the  royal  power  conferred  by  God." 

In  other  words  it  is  the  divinely  appointed  duty 
of  princes  to  care  for  the  spiritual  and  eternal 
welfare  of  their  subjects  as  well  as  for  their  ma- 

1  Loci  communes  theologici,  1610-1622,  Locus  xxv,  quoted 
by  Rieker,  210. 

2  Tractatus  de  regimine  seculari  et  ecclesiasticot   1619; 
Rieker,  213. 


126        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

terial  interests.  Once  this  principle  was  clearly 
established  it  was  impossible  to  avoid  the  conclu- 
sion that  both  the  jus  circa  sacra  and  the  jus  in 
sacra  were  vested  in  the  civil  ruler,  and  that  the 
whole  religious  and  ecclesiastical  life  of  the  peo- 
ple lay  in  his  hands.  To  strengthen  this  conten- 
tion the  early  apologists  advanced  as  a  second 
argument  the  terms  of  treaties  of  Passau  (1543) 
and  Augsburg  (1555).  By  these,  it  was  said, 
the  rights  formerly  held  and  exercised  by  the 
pope  and  the  Roman  Catholic  bishops  had  de- 
volved upon  the  civil  rulers  of  the  German  Prot- 
estant states,  and  therefore  whatever  had  been 
competent  for  the  pope  in  former  times  was  com- 
petent for  German  princes  today. 

This  argument,  however,  was  not  felt  to  be 
essential,  or  to  add  anything  to  that  of  divine 
right,  for  no  sooner  was  it  stated  than  the  writers 
hasten  to  explain  that  the  pope  and  bishops  had 
usurped  the  power  they  had  exercised,  and  there- 
fore its  assumption  by  the  princes  should  be  re- 
garded as  a  restitution  rather  than  a  devolution. 
In  either  case  however,  whether  the  power  came 
immediately  from  God  or  mediately  from  the 
Roman  hierarchy,  this  process  of  argumentation 
showed  the  princes  to  be  bishops  and  even  popes 
in  their  own  territories.  Indeed,  one  writer3 

8  Samuel  Stryck,  De  jure  papali  principum  evangelico- 
rum;  De  principe  quolibet  papa  in  suo  territoris,  1690, 
Rieker,  222  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        127 

pointed  out  that  the  comparison  does  injustice  to 
the  dignity  of  the  German  princes  (infra  digni- 
tatem nostrorum  principum) .  The  bishops  were 
subject  to  the  pope  and  the  pope  himself  gener- 
ally restricted  by  the  college  of  cardinals,  but  the 
German  Protestant  prince  is  superior  to  all  con- 
trol, and  acts  freely  out  of  the  fulness  of  his  su- 
preme power  (ex  summae  potestatis  ecclesiasti- 
cae  plenitudine). 

However  logical  and  conclusive  such  reasoning 
might  appear  to  be  it  labored  under  the  defect  of 
proving  too  much.  It  was  obvious  to  all  that  the 
prince,  in  not  taking  part  personally  in  matters 
affecting  the  inner  life  of  the  church  such  as 
preaching  and  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments, was  not  a  bishop  in  fact,  according  to  the 
established  sense  of  the  word,  no  matter  what  he 
might  be  in  theory.  Moreover,  there  was  still 
such  force  in  the  traditions  of  the  independence  of 
the  church,  that  is  to  say,  of  the  clergy,  and  of  the 
rights  of  all  Christians  according  to  the  Protes- 
tant scheme,  that  some  account  had  to  be  taken  of 
them.  Accordingly  we  find  these  writers  taking 
away  with  one  hand  what  they  had  bestowed  with 
the  other,  or  endeavoring  to  limit  the  prince's 
exercise  of  power  if  not  the  power  itself.  Chem- 
nitz4 says  that  the  pious  and  Christian  magistrate 
may  not  call  and  instal  ministers  "without  the  will 
and  consent  of  the  clergy  and  the  rest  of  the 

4  Loci  theologici,  Rieker,  209. 


128        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

church,"  and  Reinginck  reminds  the  prince  that 
he  is  "not  the  whole  church  but  only  a  member 
of  it,  not  its  lord  but  its  nurse."  More  par- 
ticularly, it  is  affirmed  with  respect  to  the 
office  of  preaching,  administering  the  sacra- 
ments and  absolving  sinners  that  "the  civil 
magistrate  ought  not  to  perform  these  duties 
himself,  nor  indeed  does  he  in  our  churches,"  but 
he  shall  see  that  they  are  "properly  performed  by 
superintendents  and  ministers  of  the  church  ac- 
cording to  the  order  divinely  instituted  for  the 
evangelical  pattern,"  the  superintendents  and 
ministers  of  course  to  be  appointed  by  himself. 
Moreover,  in  exercising  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
the  prince  should  act  through  the  consistorial 
courts  which  although  created  by  him  are  never- 
theless regarded  as  church  courts,  one  writer5 
even  going  so  far  as  to  say  that  the  powers  con- 
ferred upon  them  cannot  be  recalled. 

With  regard  to  this  Episcopal  Theory  not 
much  need  be  said.  It  was  the  first  attempt  of 
the  Lutheran  church  legally  to  justify  its  posi- 
tion as  over  against  the  Roman  Catholic  church. 
In  this  it  must  be  admitted  to  have  been  success- 
ful for  it  simply  applied  the  Roman  Canon  Law 
to  the  Lutheran  church  except  that  in  the  place 
of  pope  and  bishops  it  set  the  territorial  ruler. 
Apart  from  this,  however,  it  accomplished  noth- 
ing. "It  had  little  or  no  influence  upon  the  actual 

5  M.  Stephani  as  quoted  by  Rieker,  217. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        129 

conditions  or  the  prevailing  system."6  It  is  inter- 
esting, however,  because  of  the  change  it  shows  in 
the  conception  of  the  civil  ruler  as  compared  with 
the  views  of  Luther.  The  prince  is  no  longer 
merely  a  conspicuous  member  of  the  church  using 
his  office  in  case  of  need  and  extraordinarily  to 
purge  and  reform  it.  He  has  ceased  to  be  "emer- 
gency bishop"  and  has  become  a  real  bishop  in  the 
canonical  sense  of  the  word,  with  no  less  and  per- 
haps even  more  power  than  had  been  possessed 
by  the  Roman  bishops,  for  there  were  absolutely 
no  legal  limits  to  his  jurisdiction. 

It  is  important  too,  in  view  of  what  is  to  follow, 
to  note  that  the  bond  uniting  the  prince  and  the 
church  is  still  regarded  as  a  religious  one.  It  is 
as  bishop  that  he  rules  and  not  as  civil  ruler. 
There  was  no  doubt  confusion  here  but  some  of 
the  writers7  of  the  time  thought  their  way  through 
to  the  conception  of  a  double  personality  of  the 
ruler  as  prince  and  bishop.  And  finally  it  is 
worthy  of  remark  that  the  whole  structure  of  the 
church  is  conceived  exactly  as  in  Roman  times 
from  above  down.  All  authority  is  vested  in  the 
prince  bishop,  a  little  influence  and  some  rights 
are  reserved  for  the  clergy,  but  the  mass  of  peo- 
ple, whom  Luther  had  called  to  be  priests,  bishops 
and  popes,  are  hardly  brought  into  view.  They 
are  merely  objects  of  the  church's  activity. 

6  Sehling,  Geschichte,  34>. 

7M.  Stephani  and  Carpzov,  Rieker,  217  f. 


130        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

r  During  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury two  attacks  were  made  upon  the  existing 
system,  one  being  religious  and  taking  its  depart- 
ure from  Luther's  doctrine  of  the  universal 
priesthood,  the  other  being  political  and  allied 
with  doctrine  of  the  rights  of  man.  JSpener,  the 
father  of  Pietism,  was  the  champion  of  the  first. 
Filled  with  alarm  at  what  he  considered  the  mori- 
bund condition  of  Christianity  in  the  Lutheran 
churches,  and  encouraged  thereto  by  the  healthier 
condition  of  the  Calvinistic  churches  in  Switzer- 
land and  France,  Spener  advocated  strongly  the 
introduction  of  a  system  of  church  government 
which  would  recognize  the  rights  of  the  individual 
Christian  and  place  the  control  of  the  church, 
to  a  great  extent  at  least,  in  the  hands  of  the 
congregations. 

Writing  of  the  absolute  control  of  their  par- 
ishes by  the  clergy  in  1691  he  said  :8  "If  the  Chris- 
tian church  is  to  be  organized  aright,  its  constitu- 
tion must  be  of  such  a  nature  as  to  allow  all  three 
estates  to  have  their  own  spheres  of  labor  and  to 
cooperate  in  everything  pertaining  to  the  life  of 
the  church.  This  is  the  condition  which  is  most  in 
keeping  with  the  divine  institution,  the  most  com- 
patible with  the  universal  edification  of  the 
churches,  and  the  most  blessed  of  God  ....  If , 
however,  it  so  happens  that  one  estate  alone,  es- 
pecially the  clergy,  usurps  the  power  in  the 

8  Bedenken,  quoted  by  Richter,  201  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        131 

churches  and  claims  it  as  of  right  belonging  to 
their  office,  and  so  will  not  submit  to  correction 
by  the  other  estates,  then  there  exists  a  condition 
which  is  not  to  be  praised  nor  even  tolerated. 
Indeed,  such  unwarranted  assumption  of  power 
by  the  clergy  is  genuinely  papistical  and  anti- 
christian  and  incompatible  with  the  mainten- 
ance of  the  truth." 

With  the  position  occupied  by  the  secular  au- 
thorities he  is  equally  dissatisfied.9  "It  is  un- 
doubtedly true  that  God  has  laid  upon  the  civil 
rulers  the  duty  of  enforcing  the  first  as  well  as 
the  second  table  of  the  law,  and  so  of  upholding 
His  honor.  But  one  sees  very  few  of  them  taking 
any  interest  in  the  matter,  except  that  they  claim 
the  jus  episcopale  as  their  prerogative,  increasing 
their  own  glory  rather  than  the  divine  honor.  .  .  . 
And  so  the  jus  episcopale  which  should  be  exer- 
cised for  the  benefit  of  the  church  has  become  the 
very  means  whereby  everything  good  is  hin- 
dered ....  It  has  become  the  impediment  of 
everything  good,  so  that  when  the  civil  power 
will  not  undertake  a  thing,  those  of  the  clergy 
and  laity  that  would  willingly  do  good,  dare  not. 
I  have  often  lauded  some  churches  that  live  under 
the  authority  of  a  ruler  of  another  faith  and  suf- 
fer hardship  in  respect  to  externals,  as  much 
happier  than  those  that  have  the  ruler  on  their 
side.  For,  having  full  control  of  the  placing  of 

9  Bedenken,  quoted  by  Richter,  201  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

preachers,  of  discipline  and  of  church  organiza- 
tion, all  of  which  they  exercise  with  splendid 
modesty  and  zeal,  through  the  pastors,  elders 
and  the  regulations  of  the  congregations,  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  edify  all  and  without  detriment 
to  the  ruler,  they  accomplish  much  more  than 
those  churches  which  dare  not  do  anything  with- 
out the  ruler,  and  whose  ruler  is  often  opposed 
to  what  is  good.  For  this  reason  I  regard  such 
caesaropapacy  and  secular  anti-christianity  as  a 
greater  evil  than  that  which  destroys  the  exter- 
nals of  the  church." 

Spener's  interests  like  Luther's  were  altogether 
religious.  He  too  did  not  regard  organization 
or  government  as  of  the  esse  of  the  church,  nor 
has  he  left  any  systematic  statement  or  plan  for 
its  reconstruction.  But  from  these  passages  and 
other  similar  ones  it  is  possible  to  affirm  without 
hesitation  that  he  wished  to  see  the  authority,  at 
least  in  congregational  matters,  taken  from  the 
princes  and  put  in  the  hands  of  the  clergy  and 
jaitY.  Each  congregation  should  elect  its  own 
elders,  who  with  the  pastor  or  pastors  should 
have  the  management  of  all  matters  pertaining 
to  the  congregational  life,  including  of  course  the 
discipline,  which  he  admired  so  much  in  the  Cal- 
vinistic  churches,  and  wished  to  see  introduced 
into  his  own.  It  is  interesting,  however,  that  he 
too,  like  Luther,  doubted  the  possibility  of  find- 
ing suitable  individuals  for  the  eldership  in  the 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        133 

German  churches,10  and  that  he  would  not  ex- 
clude the  civil  ruler  from  participation  in  the 
church  courts.  Unlike  Luther  he  regarded  the 
clerical  office  as  of  divine  appointment,  just  as 
he  did  the  priesthood  of  all  believers. 

The  great  service  of  Pietism  in  respect  to  the 
constitution  of  the  church  was  that  it  jtirred  up 
the  people  to  a  recognition  of  their  Christian  re- 
sppnsibilities  and  thus  prepared  the  way  for  their 
assuming  the  burdens  of  the  church  at  a  later 
date.  On  the  existing  legal  condition  of  the  time 
it  made  no  impression  whatever.  One  reason  for 
this  was  that  Pietism  besides  advocating  a  greater  / 
liberty  for  the  individual  Christian  was  entangled 
in  the  dogmatic  and  political  quarrels  of  the  day,  ) 
and  hence  this  minor  point,  not  receiving  separate  ! 
consideration,  was  condemned  as  part  of  an  un- 
orthodox and  fanatical  program.  Indeed  the  day 
was  long  past  when  participation  of  the  laity  in 
the  ecclesiastical  government  could  be  pointed  to 
as  a  genuinely  Lutheran  idea.  It  was  regarded  as 
one  of  the  earmarks  of  Calvinism,  and  so  when  it 
made  its  appearance  together  with  the  collegia 
pietatis,  which  were  confessedly  modelled  on  Cal- 
vinistic  gatherings,  and  a  spirit  of  toleration  quite 
foreign  to  orthodox  Lutheranism,  the  leaders  of 
the  church  took  alarm  at  once  and  condemned  them 
all  together,  calling  upon  the  civil  magistrate,  as 
the  guardian  of  right  doctrine,  to  intervene,  with 

10  RE,  xxiii,  505. 


134        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  result  that  what  promised  to  be  the  greatest 
religious  awakening  in  Germany  since  the  days 
of  Luther  was  driven  in  some  places  to  separa- 
tism and  fanaticism,  and  many  of  its  adherents 
forced  to  leave  the  home  land. 

The  other  attack  came  in  the  train  of  the  po- 
litical and  social  philosophy  of  the  "Law  of  Na- 
ture," and  was  intimately  associated  with  the 
naturalistic  and  humanistic  doctrines  and  prac- 
tices known  as  the  Enlightenment.  According 
to  Natural  Law  organized  society  is  the  result  of 
a  contract  between  ruler  and  subjects,  the  pur- 
pose of  which  is  that  men  may  live  happily  and 
peacefully  together.  It  is  therefore  the  sole  duty 
of  the  ruler  to  see  that  peace  and  tranquillity  are 
maintained.  He  is  not  ordained  of  God,  nor  is 
it  his  duty  to  care  for  the  spiritual  and  eternal 
welfare  of  his  subjects.  His  direction  of  religion, 
or  rather  of  religions,  is  to  be  governed  by  politi- 
cal utility.11  With  this  went  a  change  in  the  con- 
ception of  the  scope  of  government.  Instead  of 
a  complex  of  rights,  duties,  prerogatives  and 
privileges  it  was  now  regarded  as  one  and  abso- 
lute, with  no  human  control  or  definition  save  the 
common  good  of  the  state.12  In  this  way  the 

11  Thomasius,    Institutio    iurisprudentiae,    iii,    6,    §  150, 
quoted  by  Rieker,  237,  "religiones  debent  dirigi  secundum 
utilitatem  singularum  rerumpublicarum" 

12  "Potestas  summa,  id  est  in  sui  exercitio  a  nullo  homine 
tanquam  superiore  dependens,  sed  ex  proprio  iudicio  sese 
exserens,  sic  ut  eiusdem  actus  a  nemine  tanquam  superiore 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        135 

whole  orthodox  conception  of  the  state  as  a  divine 
institution  whose  object  was  to  maintain  the  two 
tables  of  the  law  was  undermined,  and  although 
its  advocates  left  a  place  for  the  church  and  re- 
vealed religion  the  defenders  of  the  faith  felt  that 
their  citadel  was  attacked  and  used  every  means 
to  repel  the  enemy. 

The  theory  of  the  church  suffered  no  less  vio- 
lently. Instead  of  being  a  divine  institution,  of 
which  of  course  only  one  was  possible,  it  was  now 
represented  as  a  society  or  association  of  individ- 
uals adhering  to  a  common  confession.  With 
such  a  definition  of  course  many  churches  were 
possible,  all  of  which  had  an  equal  right  to  exist 
under  the  Law  of  Nature,  and  should  be  per- 
mitted by  the  state  as  far  as  compatible  with  the 
general  peace.  With  this  theory  went  a  practical 
tendency  to  recognize  some  truth  in  every  church 
and  to  deny  infallibility  and  perfection  to  any  of 
them,  and  from  this  again  a  tendency  to  accept 
as  true  only  those  elements  common  to  all  the 
churches,  from  which  it  was  but  a  step  to  natural 
religion.  Leibnitz's  abortive  plan  for  the  union 
of  Catholics  and  Protestants  sprang  from  this 
school  of  thought. 

As  for  the  structure  of  the  church,  or  as  we 


queant  irriti  reddi."  Thomasius,  as  quoted  by  Rieker,,  240. 
Similarly  Pufendorf,  Die  iure  naturae  et  gentium,  vii,  3, 
§  1 :  Summum  imperium  quod  in  omni  civitate  existit  et 
quo  velut  anima  ilia  vivit  ac  libratur." 


136        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

should  say,  the  churches,  the  same  principles  were 
applied  as  had  been  used  to  explain  civil  society 
and  government.  In  the  words  of  Pfaff,13  by 
whom  the  Collegiate  Theory,  as  it  is  called,  was 
most  clearly  defined,  a  church  is  "a  free  associa- 
tion of  those  that  gather  together  for  the  common 
worship  of  God  according  to  the  command  of 
Christ."  Being  a  free  association  there  can  be 
no  external  authority  over  it,  and  no  one  can  be 
forced  to  join  against  his  will.  There  are  not 
three  estates  in  the  church  as  formerly  main- 
tained, the  political,  the  clerical  and  the  economi- 
cal, but  only  two,  namely,  the  clergy  and  the 
laity,  neither  of  which  has  authority  over  the 
other.  A  church  like  all  other  human  societies  has 
the  right  to  call  and  dismiss  its  officers  or  minis- 
ters, to  agree  upon  a  constitution  or  creed,  to 
make  and  enforce  the  laws  of  the  society,  and  ex- 
pel members  that  will  not  obey  them. 

The  laity  too,  according  to  this  theory,  have  a 
share  in  all  the  activities  of  the  church.  They  are 
a  royal  priesthood  and  may  exercise  all  the  func- 
tions of  the  priesthood.  They  have  the  right  to 
search  the  Scriptures  and  test  all  doctrine  by 
them,  to  share  in  the  choice  of  pastors  and  elders, 
to  sit  in  all  church  meetings  and  vote  on  all  ques- 
tions even  those  concerning  doctrine,  to  act  with 
pastor  and  elders  in  removing  abuses,  reforming 
errors,  expelling  unworthy  members;  they  have 

13  Akademische  Reden,  38;  quoted  by  Rieker,  266. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        137 

even  the  right  of  withdrawing  from  the  church 
and  forming  a  new  congregation  when  doctrinal 
error  or  spiritual  tyranny  makes  it  impossible  for 
them  to  remain  with  a  clean  conscience.  As  for  the 
pastors,  they  combine  in  themselves  the  offices  of 
teachers  and  elders,  and  have  the  right  and  duty 
to  teach,  administer  the  sacraments,  edify  the 
congregation  by  word  and  example,  care  for  the 
soul  of  each  individual  member,  catechize  the 
youth,  comfort  the  sick  and  dying,  punish  sin  and 
exclude  the  unrepentent  from  the  church.  As 
every  church  has  exactly  the  same  rights  as  any 
other  church  it  follows  that  none  may  rule  over 
another.  And  as  there  is  no  common  authority 
over  them  all  to  dictate  terms  of  peace  and  agree- 
ment, all  should  behave  courteously  and  consid- 
erately toward  the  others,  not  attempting  to  ex- 
ercise a  power  which  they  do  not  possess. 

It  might  naturally  be  supposed  that  such  a 
theory  as  this  is  would  conclude  with  a  practical, 
if  not  entire,  separation  of  church  and  state.  But 
such  was  not  the  case.  As  the  advocates  of  the 
Episcopal  Theory  no  sooner  clothed  the  prince 
with  absolute  powers  than  they  began  to  divest 
him  of  them,  so  the  advocates  of  the  Collegiate 
Theory  had  no  sooner  proved  the  right  of  the 
churches  to  govern  themselves  than  they  deprived 
them  of  nearly  all  they  had  bestowed.  One  rea- 
son for  this  was  that,  according  to  the  new  theory, 
the  state,  being  all  powerful,  could  brook  no  rival 


138        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

or  potential  rival.  As  Thomasius14  says,  "If  we 
admit  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  ecclesiastical 
government  we  deprive  the  prince  of  his  best 
prerogative,  namely  the  ius  circa  sacra,  hence  it 
is  best  to  say  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  eccles- 
iastical government."  Another  reason  was  that 
the  advocates  of  the  rights  of  man  in  Germany, 
unlike  its  representatives  elsewhere,  taught,  with 
respect  to  both  the  state  and  the  church,  that  the 
power  originally  lodged  with  the  individual  mem- 
bers of  the  society  may  pass  irrevocably  out  of 
their  hands  by  the  tacit  or  expressed  contract 
with  a  prince.  This  had  taken  place,  they  said, 
in  the  Protestant  churches  of  Germany.  In  the 
time  of  the  Reformation  they  had  called  upon 
their  rulers  to  reform  them,  to  appoint  orthodox 
teachers  and  regulate  ecclesiastical  affairs.  The 
princes  therefore  by  this  pact  have  become  the 
governors  of  the  church  and  remain  such  until 
by  the  introduction  of  heresy  or  other  breach  of 
the  terms  of  contract  they  forfeit  their  rights, 
which  then  return  to  the  churches.15 

How  far  the  prince's  government  was  sup- 
posed to  extend  may  be  seen  from  a  list  given  by 
Bohmer.16  He  had  the  right  of  issuing  ecclesias- 
tical ordinances,  of  reforming  dogma,  of  regulat- 

14  Der  Kirchenrechtsgelahrtheit  erster  Tell,   9;   Rieker, 
253. 

15  Pfaff,  Origines  iuris  ecclesiastic ae,  335  ff.     Mosheim, 
Allgemeines  Kirchenrecht,  214. 

16  As  quoted  by  Sehling,  Geschichte,  26. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        139 

ing  the  rites,  correcting  the  manner  of  preaching, 
overseeing  discipline,  deciding  theological  dis- 
putes, and  of  convoking  and  directing  synods; 
in  short,  just  what  he  was  supposed  to  have  by 
the  Episcopal  Theory,  and  just  what  he  had.  In 
addition  to  this,  according  to  the  new  theory,  he 
had  the  same  power  over  the  churches  as  over 
other  societies,  such  as  the  right  to  prohibit  and 
suppress  them  if  they  were  injurious  to  the  state, 
to  limit  the  number  of  their  members  and  of 
meetings,  to  send  commissioners  to  ascertain 
what  was  being  said  and  done,  to  inquire  into  the 
character  and  general  fitness  of  the  officers  of  the 
society,  to  see  that  the  laws  of  the  society  were 
obeyed  and  to  eject  any  that  were  not  submissive, 
to  reform  them  when  they  deteriorate  and  to  hold 
them  to  the  performance  of  their  duties.17  In 
short,  what  we  have  here  is  simply  a  picture  of 
what  the  Germans  expressively  and  appropriately 
call  a  police  state  ("Polizei-staat") .  And  when  it 
is  added  that  the  civil  ruler  alone  had  the  right 
to  decide  how,  when  and  where  he  should  inter- 
fere, to  set  bounds  to  his  own  jurisdiction,  it  is 
evident  that  the  Collegiate  Theory  in  the  form 
in  which  it  was  advocated  gave  little  or  no  free- 
dom to  the  church. 

This  form  of  the  Collegiate  Theory  has  quite 
properly  been  regarded  as  so  far  differing  from 
the  other  as  to  require  a  name  of  its  own,  viz.,  the 

17  Pfaff,  Akademische  Reden,  90  ff.     Rieker,  269. 


140        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Territorial  Theory.  In  the  Territorial  Theory, 
it  must  be  noted,  the  relation  of  the  prince  to  the 
church  had  been  radically  altered.  He  was  no 
longer  regarded  as  a  bishop,  or  as  charged  with 
the  duty  of  promoting  religion  and  of  using  his 
magisterial  office  in  the  service  of  the  church. 
On  the  contrary  the  welfare  of  the  state,  more 
particularly  the  peace  of  the  state,  was  to  be  his 
first  and  highest  duty,  and  the  churches  were  to 
be  controlled  in  such  fashion  as  not  to  disturb  or 
injure  it.  The  work  of  propagating  religion  was 
entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  religious  societies. 
Hence  the  spectacle  of  a  prince  of  one  faith  rul- 
ing over  and  controlling  a  church  of  another 
ceases  to  be  either  improper  or  anomalous. 

If  we  ask  what  was  the  immediate  ^effect  of 
Pietism  and  the  Law  of  Nature  on  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  church  and  its  form  of  government 
we  must  answer  that  they  had  none.  The  whole 
system  was  so  interwoven  with  naturalistic  the- 
ories, pietistic  practices  and  toleration  of  other 
denominations  that  it  called  forth  the  liveliest  op- 
position from  the  orthodox  Lutheran  ministers. 
The  theologian  Johann  Benedict  Carpzov18  in 
particular  rewrote  the  apology  for  the  Episcopal 
Theory  with  special  reference  to  the  new  theory 
of  the  rights  of  the  individual  Christians,  defend- 
ing the  supreme  authority  of  the  prince  in  ec- 

18  De  iure  decidendi  controversias  theologicast  1696. 
Richter,  206. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        141 

clesiastical  matters  as  of  divine  right  as  well  as 
based  on  human  law,  ascribing  to  the  clergy  con- 
siderable power  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  in- 
ner life  of  the  church,  but  limiting  the  laity  to 
the  right  of  examining  and  approving.  His 
scorn  of  the  plan  to  allow  the  people  a  voice  in 
church  matters  is  shown  in  a  satirical  apostrophe 
to  Jacob  Boehme,  and  a  picture  of  a  synod  in 
which  cobblers  and  other  artisans  meet  together 
with  spinsters  and  cooks  to  determine  the  theo- 
logical disputes  of  the  day. 

Another  reason  for  the  failure  of  the  Colle- 
giate Theory  to  make  any  immediate  impression 
upon  the  existing  condition  was  that  it  was  in 
direct  conflict  with  the  political  absolutism  of  the 
time,  fortified  now  by  the  recent  introduction  of 
Roman  Law  and  the  new  defence  of  classical 
imperialism  by  the  advocates  of  the  natural  rights 
of  man.  The  Territorial  Theory  was  quite  in  ac- 
cord with  all  this  but  the  Collegiate  Theory  was 
not.  At  the  same  time  there  was  nothing  in  the 
Collegiate  Theory,  as  expounded  by  the  earliest 
writers,  which  was  at  variance  with  the  actual 
practice,  and  it  persisted  as  an  historical  explana- 
tion of  the  origin  of  the  church.  There  was  no 
indication  that  the  individual  congregations  or 
collegia  would  demand  the  restoration  of  their 
original  rights  from  the  princes.  For  except  in 
Pietistic  circles,  the  Collegiate  Theory  and  the 
allied  doctrine  of  the  rights  of  men  existed  only 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

in  the  heads  of  theorists  and  roused  an  interest 
only  in  academic  circles.  In  France  it  had  been 
called  forth,  a  hundred  years  before,  by  the  mas- 
sacre of  St.  Bartholomew  and  the  necessity  of 
legally  defending  the  Huguenot  wars.  It  bore 
fruit  in  the  political  struggle  which  culminated 
in  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes,  and 
later  in  a  purely  naturalistic  form  in  the  French 
Revolution.  But  in  Germany  there  was  neither 
the  spur  of  necessity  nor  the  driving  power  of 
Calvinism  to  translate  it  into  deeds.  It  remained 
simply  a  theoretical  and  academic  explanation 
of  the  origin  and  constitution  of  social  groups. 
As  such,  however,  it  had  considerable  influence 
in  preparing  the  way  for  the  more  liberal  and 
democratic  ideas  of  the  latter  part  of  the  eigh- 
teenth and  the  nineteenth  century.  The  standard 
textbooks  all  agreed  in  representing  the  church  as 
a  society  of  likeminded  Christians  banded  together 
of  their  own  free  will,  little  more  than  which  could 
be  expected  in  this  period  of  severe  centraliza- 
tion of  all  power  in  the  hands  of  the  civil  ruler.19 
"Town  and  village  communities,  districts  and 
provinces  ceased  to  have  any  common  life  of  their 
own  or  to  possess  any  rights  of  their  own.  They 
were  merely  objects  of  the  state's  activities,  geo- 
graphical districts  for  the  state's  administration. 
Between  them  and  the  sovereign  state  there  was 

19  Preusz,    Gemeindef    Staat,   Reich,    alt    Gebietskorper- 
schaften,  1889,  126. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        143 

no  legal  relationship,  for  they  were  not  regarded 
as  entities  with  a  communal  existence,  or  as  hav- 
ing any  will  of  their  own."  The  church  or  the 
churches  too  fell  under  the  suspicion  of  the  state 
authorities,  which,  like  the  Roman  Empire  before 
them,  regarded  all  societies  or  collegia  as  poten- 
tial seed  plots  of  treason,  and  sought  by  bureau- 
cratic and  pedantic  methods  to  limit  and  control 
their  activities  or  even  to  force  them  into  the  ser- 
vice of  the  state. 

During  the  period  of  these  debates  the  whims 
and  individual  peculiarities  of  the  princes  found 
expression  in  their  regulation  of  church  affairs 
quite  as  freely  as  during  the  period  immediately 
following  the  Reformation,  the  only  difference 
being  that  there  was  now  greater  variety  in  their 
religious  views,  and  that  their  ecclesiastical  policy 
was  more  evidently  influenced  by  political 
expediency.  To  illustrate  this  it  will  be  suffi- 
cient to  cite  some  examples  from  Prussia,  choos- 
ing this  state  rather  than  others,  both  because 
after  the  defection  of  Augustus  the  Strong  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  church  on  his  assumption  of  the 
crown  of  Poland  (1697)  Prussia  stepped  into  the 
place  formerly  occupied  by  Saxony  as  the  lead- 
ing German  Protestant  state,  and  because  the 
rapid  expansion  of  Prussia  brought  about  new 
conditions,  such  as  the  incorporation  of  Roman 
Catholic  provinces  in  the  kingdom,  necessitating 
a  new  ecclesiastical  policy,  and  gave  to  the  Prus- 


144        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

sian  law  and  custom  an  ever  growing  prestige 
among  the  other  states. 

As  we  have  seen  before,  the  conversion  of 
Johann  Sigismund  to  the  Calvinistic  faith  and  his 
failure  to  win  or  force  his  subjects  to  it  led  to 
the  legal  recognition  of  both  branches  of  Protest- 
antism in  Brandenburg  and  Prussia,  and  the 
adoption  of  a  policy  of  conciliation  by  the  house 
of  Hohenzollern.  By  giving  equal  recognition 
to  the  Calvinists  with  the  Lutheran  and  Roman 
Catholics  the  Peace  of  Westphalia  (1648)  had 
removed  any  imperial  legal  restriction  that  might 
have  been  urged  against  the  toleration  of  Calvin- 
ists, and  by  ordering  that  converted  princes 
might  not  force  their  subjects  to  change  their 
faith  also,  it  actually  enjoined  a  degree  of  tolera- 
tion in  some  states.  At  the  same  time  it  confirmed 
to  the  individual  states  the  right  of  reforming 
religion  and  so  left  the  prince  supreme  over  what- 
ever church  or  churches  existed  in  his  territory. 
This  was  one  factor  making  for  toleration  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  subordination  of  the  churches 
to  the  state  on  the  other. 

To  this  must  be  added  the  influence  of  Pietism 
and  the  humanistic  theories  of  the  Enlighten- 
ment, which  was  entirely  on  the  side  of  toleration, 
also  the  imperialistic  theories  of  government, 
which,  coupled  with  the  dazzling  example  of  the 
court  of  Louis  XIV  in  France,  inspired  every 
petty  German  state  with  the  ambition  to  unite 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        145 

in  itself  the  closely  articulated  government  of 
imperial  Rome  with  the  glories  of  modern  France. 
Freedom  of  conscience  on  the  one  hand  and  state 
absolutism  on  the  other,  these  two  ideas  super- 
imposed upon  and  mingling  with  denominational 
intolerance  and  the  episcopal  supremacy  of  the 
civil  ruler  gave  its  peculiar  character  to  the  eccles- 
iastical policy  of  the  eighteenth  century,  while  the 
necessity  of  maintaining  the  army  and  of  repopu- 
lating  ravaged  lands  and  otherwise  making  good 
the  damage  of  the  Thirty  Years  War  entered  as 
a  material  factor  in  the  decision  of  particular 
cases. 

The  Great  Elector  (1640-1688),  an  ardent 
Calvinist,  was  at  once  a  champion  of  freedom  of 
conscience  and  an  ecclesiastical  despot.  When 
the  Edict  of  Nantes  was  revoked  (1685)  and  the 
Calvinists  of  France  were  forced  in  thousands  to 
seek  refuge  in  other  lands,  his  commissioners  met 
them  at  the  boundary  and  transported  them  to 
homes  where  they  were  guaranteed  the  free  exer- 
cise of  their  religion  and  special  privileges  of  other 
kinds.  To  the  Catholics  also  he  allowed  the  liberty 
of  worship  and  considerable  freedom  in  respect 
to  the  laws  of  their  church.  But  he  also  thought 
himself  justified  in  forbidding  his  subjects  to  at- 
tend the  strongly  Lutheran  University  of  Wit- 
tenberg, in  interfering  in  internal  affairs  of  the 
churches,  regulating  such  matters  as  the  use  of 
Latin  hymns,  crosses,  vestments  and  the  liturgy 


146        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

generally,  in  appointing  days  of  prayer  and  fast- 
ing for  all  his  subjects  irrespective  of  creed  and 
even  prescribing  the  text  for  the  sermon,  while 
he  informed  even  the  Catholics  that  they  should 
regard  him  as  their  lord  and  bishop  in  spiritual 
matters  and  not  accept  commands  from  foreign 
rulers.20 

By  his  son  Frederick  (1688-1713),  the  first  of 
the  electors  to  assume  the  title  of  king,  definite 
attempts  were  made  to  effect  a  real  union  of  the 
two  Protestant  confessions.  Not  content  with 
merely  removing  some  more  of  the  "Catholic  rem- 
nants" from  the  Lutheran  churches,  such  as  the 
private  confessional  and  exorcism,  or  with  direct- 
ing the  examiners  to  pay  no  attention  to  disputed 
points  of  theology  "which  are  of  no  importance 
anyway,"  he  thought  to  take  advantage  of  the 
friendlier  feeling  engendered  by  Pietism  and  the 
new  humanistic  philosophy,  in  endeavoring  to 
unite  the  two  churches  by  the  exercise  of  his  su- 
preme episcopal  authority.  Liturgical  uniform- 
ity was  to  be  enforced,  theological  harmony  to  be 
secured  by  the  retention  of  a  minimum  of  doc- 
trine, recalcitrant  ministers  to  be  silenced,  and  all 
the  members  of  both  confessions  to  be  exhorted  to 
love  one  another.  Unfortunately  for  his  plans 
this  program  which  was  being  prepared  in  secret 

20  Lehmann,  Preuszen  und  die  katholische  Kirche;  Von 
Miihler,  Geschichte  der  evangelischen  Kirchenverfassung; 
quoted  by  Rieker,  290  8,  307  ff. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        147 

became  known  to  the  clergy,  and,  the  storm  of 
criticism  it  occasioned  savoring  little  of  brotherly 
love,  had  to  be  abandoned.  Another  and  more 
ambitious  project  had  no  better  success.  This 
was  nothing  less  than  the  union  of  the  English 
and  the  German  churches,  involving  the  introduc- 
tion into  Germany  of  the  English  liturgy,  which 
it  was  believed  had  been  useful  in  uniting  all  re- 
ligious parties  in  England,  and  of  the  episcopal 
system  which  was  more  in  keeping  with  the  dig- 
nity and  strength  of  royalty  than  the  more  demo- 
cratically conceived  consistorial  courts  and  sup- 
erintendencies  in  which  all  clergymen  were  of 
equal  rank.  Two  bishops,  one  from  either  con- 
fession, were  appointed  by  the  Elector  and  after- 
ward consecrated  by  a  bishop  of  the  Bohemian 
Brethren,  to  assist  at  the  coronation,  but  the  nego- 
tiations with  England  fell  through  on  account  of 
the  opposition  of  the  German  ministers,  and  fi- 
nally the  whole  scheme  was  abandoned  when 
Frederick  William  I,  who  had  no  sympathy  with 
it,  came  to  the  throne. 

This  prince  too  was  not  averse  to  union,  but  his 
parsimonious  and  pietistic  nature  had  no  sympa- 
thy with  the  pomp  of  episcopacy.  The  theologi- 
cal differences  between  Lutherans  and  Calvinists 
were  to  him  also  only  parsons'  quarrels  (Pfaffen- 
gezank) ,  but  his  attempt  to  unite  them  on  a  basis 
of  fifteen  articles  was  a  failure.  Personally  he 
hated  Roman  Catholicism  but  for  military  and 


148        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

political  reasons  he  protected  Roman  Catholics, 
prohibiting  all  inveighing  and  sneering  at  them, 
and  declaring  that  anyone  could  dwell  in  his 
lands  that  wanted  to,  the  more  people  the  better. 
As  there  were  papists  in  his  pampered  regiment 
of  giants  in  Potsdam  he  was  forced  to  allow  the 
Catholic  mass  to  be  sung  at  his  very  door. 

These  may  be  taken  as  examples  of  princes 
that  regarded  it  as  their  duty  and  right  to  regu- 
late the  religious  life  of  their  subjects  and  actu- 
ally attempted  to  do  so.  Frederick  the  Great  is 
the  best  representative  of  the  humanistic  and 
"Enlightened"  princes  that  regarded  religion  and 
churches  solely  from  the  standpoint  of  the  state. 
Believing  as  he  did  that  all  churches  were  founded 
upon  intrigue  and  deception  he  lacked  the  per- 
sonal, religious  and  denominational  interest  that 
incited  other  rulers  of  his  house  to  play  the  role 
of  pastor  to  their  subjects;  and  having  accepted 
for  himself  the  vague  naturalistic  and  deistical 
views  of  his  time  he  could  the  more  easily  put 
into  practice  the  naturalistic  views  of  govern- 
ment that  accompanied  them.  Accordingly  we 
find  a  greater  liberty  of  belief  than  ever  before 
accorded  not  only  to  the  three  confessions  rec- 
ognized by  the  Peace  of  Westphalia,  but  also  to 
the  members  of  the  Greek  church,  the  Men- 
nonites,  the  Socinians,  the  Schwenckfeldians,  the 
Bohemian  Brethren  and  others.  Every  one  could 
be  saved  in  his  own  fashion  in  his  kingdom,  said 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        149 

Frederick.  "All  religions  are  equally  good  if 
only  the  people  that  profess  them  are  honest,  and 
if  Turks  and  heathen  came  and  were  willing  to 
populate  the  land  we  would  build  them  mosques 
and  churches,"21  he  said  in  another  place,  indicat- 
ing both  his  standard  of  judgment  in  religious 
matters  and  the  expediency  of  a  policy  of  toler- 
ation. "False  religious  zeal  is  a  tyrant  that  de- 
populates provinces;  tolerance  is  a  kind  mother 
that  cherishes  and  advances  their  prosperity"22 
is  another  statement  from  his  mouth  to  the  same 
effect,  and  he  did  actually  contemplate  the  in- 
troduction of  Mohammedans  to  increase  the  pop- 
ulation and  provide  a  reserve  for  the  army.23 
He  demanded  of  his  subjects  "nothing  more  than 
civil  obedience  and  loyalty.  So  long  as  they  are 
faithful  in  respect  to  these,  I  regard  myself  as 
bound  to  bestow  upon  them  equal  favor,  protec- 
tion and  justice,  no  matter  what  speculative  views 
they  may  entertain  in  matters  of  religion.  Judg- 
ment upon  such  matters  I  leave  to  that  One  who 
alone  has  power  over  the  consciences  of  men,  and 
of  whom  I  cannot  form  such  a  shabby  opinion  as 
to  suppose  that  He  requires  human  assistance  to 
realize  His  plans,  or  that  it  is  pleasing  to  Him,  if 
one  imagines  he  can  be  of  assistance  either  by 

21  Quoted  by  Lehmann,  ii,  3  f . 

22  RE,  xix,  830. 

23  Zeller,  Friedrich  der  Grosse  als  Philosoph,  155;  Rieker, 
294. 


150        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

using  force,  or  cunning  or  other  indirect  means."24 
But  if  Frederick  himself  would  not  force  the 
consciences  of  his  subjects  he  insisted  that  no  one 
else  should  do  so.  The  several  churches  were 
required  to  live  at  peace  with  one  another  and  the 
preachers  to  avoid  disputed  points  of  theology. 
In  other  respects  also  he  was  not  behind  his  pre- 
decessors in  interfering  in  church  affairs,  the  only 
difference  being  that  whereas  their  interest  had 
been  in  part  at  least  religious  his  was  entirely 
political.  He  regulated  the  number  of  churches 
according  to  the  financial  ability  of  the  members 
to  be  served,  ordered  that  no  one  be  permitted 
to  enter  a  cloister  without  permission,  the  object 
in  this  case  being  to  prevent  depopulation,  de- 
clared himself  independent  of  Rome  in  his  treat- 
ment of  Catholics  and  even  forbade  the  publica- 
tion of  the  papal  bull,  abolishing  the  Society  of 
Jesus,  because  he  wished  to  retain  the  services  of 
its  members  in  the  schools. 

The  spirit  of  Frederick  the  Great's  ecclesiasti- 
cal policy  may  be  seen  best,  however,  in  the  Prus- 
sian Land  Law,  which  although  not  published  un- 
til after  his  death  was  compiled  by  jurists  of  his 
appointment  and  reflects  the  ideals  and  practice  of 
his  reign.  In  this  code  of  laws,  which  remained  in 
force  with  minor  changes  until  the  year  1900,  the 
naturalistic  philosophy  of  the  time  is  plainly  re- 

24  From  a  letter  to  the  Empress  of  Austria.  Lehmann, 
ii,  585;  Rieker,  311. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        151 

fleeted,  with  the  result  that,  on  the  one  hand,  indi- 
viduals receive  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  pri- 
vate worship,  and  congregations  are  given  con- 
siderable power  in  respect  to  calling  and  judging 
pastors,  regulating  the  liturgy  and  other  matters 
affecting  the  inner  life  of  the  church,  but  on  the 
other  hand,  the  state  reserves  the  right  to  inspect, 
supervise  and  correct  where  and  when  it  will.  In 
other  words,  the  Land  Law  consistently  looks 
down  upon  religion  from  the  higher  viewpoint  of 
the  state  and  ranges  all  churches  as  legal  associa- 
tions under  its  control.  How  far  this  control  ex- 
tends may  be  seen  from  the  following  extracts: 
The  private  and  public  religious  exercises  of  every 
religious  association  are  subject  to  the  oversight 
of  the  state.  The  state  is  entitled  to  know  what 
is  taught  and  done  in  meetings  of  the  associations. 
Any  changes  in  the  order  of  service  must  be  ap- 
proved beforehand  by  the  state.  Church  disci- 
pline must  touch  neither  the  body,  honor  nor  prop- 
erty of  the  punished  member.  If  punishment  of 
this  kind  is  necessary  it  is  to  be  meted  out  by  the 
state  authorities.  A  member  may  not  in  every 
case  be  excluded  by  the  church;  for  instance,  re- 
fusal to  accept  the  creed  is  not  proper  ground  for 
dismissal,  and  in  case  of  dispute  the  state  must 
decide.  All  the  officers  of  the  churches  are  either 
appointed  by  or  approved  by  the  state,  which  also 
holds  them  to  the  performance  of  their  duties, 
an  obedient  loyalty  to  the  state  and  comity  with 


152        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  officers  of  other  churches.  New  churches  may 
not  be  built  without  the  consent  of  the  state  nor 
property  acquired  nor  sold.  With  these  and  other 
restrictions  the  churches  are  recognized  as  "privi- 
leged corporations,"  and  permitted  to  pursue 
their  own  ends. 

The  whole  mental  attitude  of  the  law  is  that 
"The  corporation  exists  only  for  the  state  and 
not  for  itself,  for  which  reason  it  is  subjected 
to  the  will  of  the  state  as  well  as  its  own.  ...  Of 
prime  importance  is  the  sentence  that  stands  at 
the  head  of  the  section  'On  Church  Associations 
in  General':  'Every  church  association  is  obli- 
gated to  inculcate  in  its  members  the  fear  of  God, 
obedience  to  the  laws,  loyalty  to  the  state  and  an 
amicable  disposition  toward  their  fellow  citizens.' 
From  this  follow  logically  the  further  state- 
ments that  all  religious  teachings  that  run  con- 
trary to  these  may  not  be  taught  in  the  state  nor 
published  by  word  of  mouth  or  through  the  press, 
and  that  the  state  has  the  right  to  condemn  any 
such  teachings  and  to  prohibit  their  propagation. 
The  conception  of  the  church  underlying  these 
regulations  is  simply  that  it  is  a  corporation  ac- 
cording to  the  meaning  of  the  Land  Law.  That  is 
to  say,  the  churches  are  independent  associations 
ideally  separate  from  the  state.  They  do  not  dis- 
appear either  in  the  state  or  under  it.  But  they 
are  not  self-determined,  they  exist  not  merely  for 
themselves,  to  accomplish  their  own  ends  in  the 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        153 

interests  of  their  members,  but  they  exist  also  for 
the  state  and  serve  its  ends,  and  this  neither 
through  accident  or  lack  of  intention  nor  of  their 
own  free  will,  but  because  the  state  has  obliged 
them  to  do  so.  But  why  does  the  state  do  this? 
Because  it  needs  the  church  to  attain  its  own  ends, 
because  the  fear  of  God,  obedience  to  the  law, 
loyalty  to  the  state  and  an  amicable  disposition 
toward  their  fellow  citizens  are  the  indispensable 
conditions  of  its  own  success.  The  state  cannot 
produce  them  of  itself,  but  commits  them  to  the 
churches,  which  are  therefore  granted  concessions 
and  privileges,  but  also  are  constantly  watched 
and  controlled.  According  to  the  dominant  opin- 
ion of  the  eighteenth  century  the  state  alone  un- 
derstood and  was  capable  of  effecting  whatever 
served  the  common  good.  It  was  therefore  its 
duty  to  use  its  own  means  to  bring  about  this 
disposition  in  its  subjects;  but  its  means  were  not 
sufficient,  and  for  this  reason  it  transferred  some 
of  the  obligations  resting  upon  it  to  the  churches. 
These  therefore  are  performing  duties  of  the 
state,  pursuing  the  objects  of  the  state  and  serv- 
ing the  interests  of  the  state.  It  is  for  this  reason 
that  the  state  claims  such  wide  oversight  of  the 
churches  and  reserves  the  right  to  hold  them  to 
the  performance  of  their  duties.  For  the  same 
reason  it  grants  them  many  privileges  which  pri- 
vate associations  lack.  In  handling  the  churches 
in  this  way  as  corporations  the  state  stamps  them 


154        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

with  its  high  approval,  and  confesses  that  they 
perform  some  of  the  duties  and  fulfil  some  of  the 
purposes  of  the  state  and  are  therefore  essential 
to  its  welfare.  That  the  obverse  of  this  high  ap- 
preciation appears  in  the  close  supervision  of  the 
churches  is  not  surprising  in  the  police  state  of 
the  eighteenth  century.  This  attitude  does  not 
spring  from  a  suspicion  directed  particularly 
against  the  churches,  but  from  the  general  sus- 
picion of  all  associations."25 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  pointed  out  that 
the  publication  of  the  Land  Law  is  one  of  the 
mileposts  on  the  road  to  the  freedom  of  the 
church.  For  although  the  Land  Law  appears 
to  subject  the  churches  entirely  to  the  state, 
nevertheless  there  was  no  superior  right  claimed 
for  the  state  by  it  which  had  not  already  been 
exercised  by  the  prince.  What  is  new  in  this 
respect  is  that  the  state  in  controlling  the 
churches  is  no  longer  to  be  actuated  by  re- 
ligious motives  but  by  those  of  political  util- 
ity, and  in  this  lay  the  possibilities  of  much 
evil  or  much  good  according  as  the  state  allowed 
the  churches  to  go  their  own  way  or  attempted  to 
make  them  simply  tools  for  its  own  purposes. 

Generally  speaking  the  Land  Law,  reflecting  as 
it  does  the  superficial  philosophy  of  the  Enlight- 
enment, shows  little  appreciation  of  the  meaning 
and  power  of  religion  in  the  life  of  men  and  in 

25  Rieker,  299  ff. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        155 

society.  Religion  to  it  is  merely  a  phenomenon 
of  social  life  which  is  to  be  carefully  observed, 
tolerated  within  bounds,  and  permitted  to  express 
itself  publicly  only  when  and  where  it  is  not  in 
conflict  with  the  interests  of  the  state.  The  state 
is  concerned  to  see  that  violence  is  not  done  to  the 
conscience  in  the  name  of  religion  and  that  the 
public  peace  and  security  are  not  endangered  by 
the  rival  confessions,  but  in  the  positive  propaga- 
tion of  religion  it  should  not  and  would  not  take 
part.  This  was  left  to  the  churches  themselves. 

It  was  a  gain  that  the  churches  were  looked 
upon  as  entities  with  their  own  ends,  their  own 
will  and  their  own  life.  To  be  sure,  they  were 
very  much  restricted  in  their  activity  and  con- 
stantly in  danger  of  entire  suppression,  but  they 
at  least  had  the  protection  of  law  and  recourse  to 
the  tribunals  of  justice  in  case  of  arbitrary  inter- 
ference by  the  patron,  the  prince  or  any  other. 
It  was  a  gain  too  that  the  three  great  confessions 
and  some  lesser  ones  were  formally  recognized 
and  put  upon  a  legal  basis  and  that  individuals 
might  worship  God,  at  least  in  the  privacy  of 
their  homes,  in  whatever  manner  they  wished 
without  fear  of  legal  interference.  It  was  an  ap- 
proximation to  the  principles  of  the  Reformation 
also  that  so  much  power  was  put  in  the  hands  of 
the  individual  members  of  the  congregations  in 
respect  to  calling  and  dismissing  pastors  and 
otherwise  managing  the  affairs  of  the  congrega- 


156        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tion.  In  short,  the  churches  and  the  individual 
members  of  the  churches  under  the  Land  Law 
had  an  opportunity  to  feel  their  own  power  and 
exercise,  within  limits,  their  Christian  responsibil- 
ities. But  unfortunately  they  had  been  in  leading 
strings  so  long  that  they  found  it  impossible  to 
walk  alone. 

"Inasmuch  as  the  Land  Law  made  the  sharp 
distinction  between  the  rights  of  the  state  in  the 
church  and  the  rights  of  the  collegia  (congrega- 
tions) the  underlying  principle  of  the  law,  and 
not  impracticable  as  the  Collegiate  Theory  had 
done,  it  was  the  first  law  book  since  the  Reforma- 
tion to  recognize  in  a  large  way  the  ecclesiastical 
freedom  of  congregations  and  individuals.  This 
was  new  and  epoch  making.  It  is  not  to  be  over- 
looked that  the  limitation  of  the  state's  activities 
to  purely  secular  ends  and  the  consequent  refusal 
of  the  state  to  undertake  the  government  of  any- 
thing beyond  this  sphere  gave  new  liberty  in  the 
development  of  ecclesiastical  institutions  and  doc- 
trine. However  vexatious  and  petty  the  politi- 
cal control  of  the  religious  associations  was,  there 
still  remained  a  great  part  of  the  religious  life 
untouched  by  restraint.  There  was  doubtless 
more  independence  ['Ungebundenheit']  in  the 
church  than  we  are  accustomed  to  today.  There 
was  more  about  which  no  authority  troubled  it- 
self. This  freedom  and  this  independence,  how- 
ever, was  enjoyed  for  the  most  part  only  by  the 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        157 

preachers  because  the  machinery  of  the  congre- 
gations for  the  determination  and  representation 
of  their  communal  will  was  very  clumsy  and  in- 
capable of  offering  resistance  to  the  preacher."26 

The  Land  Law  reflected  the  condition  of  affairs 
under  Frederick  the  Great.  But  no  sooner  was 
his  successor  Frederick  William  II  seated  on  the 
throne  than  a  new  and  diametrically  contrary  pol- 
icy was  initiated  to  which  little  or  no  legal  opposi- 
tion could  be  offered  even  by  the  Land  Law.27  The 
story  of  the  Religious  Edict  of  1788  is  not  one 
upon  which  the  German  church  historians  like  to 
dwell,  but  it  is  important  as  showing  the  helpless- 
ness of  the  church  in  the  hands  of  the  king  and  its 
legal  powerlessness  to  avoid  aggression.  The 
Edict  was  not  the  work  of  the  weak  king  so  much 
as  of  his  favorite  minister  Wollner,  a  man  who 
had  been  in  succession  private  tutor,  pastor,  Free 
Mason  and  Rosicrucian,  and  had  been  curtly  con- 
demned by  Frederick  the  Great  as  a  "scheming 
and  deceitful  parson."  His  last  passion,  which  he 
shared  with  his  fellow  Rosicrucian  the  king,  was 
to  restore  to  the  people  the  religion  of  their  fath- 
ers and  save  them  from  the  perdition  of  the  ra- 
tionalism then  dominant  in  the  pulpits.  Accord- 

26  Foerster,  Die  Entstehung   der  Preussischen  Landes- 
kirche  unter  der  Regierung  Konig  Friedrich  Wilhelms  des 
Dritten,  1905,  32. 

27  The  Religious  Edict  was  published  in  1788,  the  Land 
Law  not  until  1794.     The  latter,  however,  was  in  course  of 
preparation  and  its  contents  known  to  those  about  the  king. 


158        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

ingly  there  appeared  early  in  the  reign  an  edict, 
in  which  the  king  declared  that  he  had  long  felt 
it  to  be  his  duty  to  restore  Christianity  in  its  ori- 
ginal purity,  and  put  a  stop  to  unbelief,  supersti- 
tion and  the  unbridled  immorality  springing  from 
them.  For  this  reason  the  three  great  confes- 
sions, the  Lutheran,  the  Calvinistic  and  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  churches,  are  to  be  recognized  and 
protected  in  their  former  rights.  The  Jews,  the 
Mennonites,  the  Moravian  Brethren  at  Herrn- 
hut,  and  the  Bohemian  Brethren  also  are  to  be 
recognized  as  "tolerated  sects."  All  other  con- 
venticles injurious  alike  to  the  Christian  religion 
and  the  state  are  forbidden,  and  all  proselytizing 
prohibited.  The  king  especially  laments  that  so 
many  preachers  have  been  led  away  from  the  old 
faith  and  attempt  to  feed  their  flocks  with  the 
long  dead  errors  of  the  Socinians,  Deists,  Natur- 
alists and  others  with  the  result  that  doubt  is  cast 
upon  the  truth  of  the  Scripture  and  Christianity 
is  held  up  to  scorn.  This  he  will  not  permit,  for  it 
is  the  first  duty  of  a  Christian  prince  to  maintain 
and  protect  the  Christian  religion  in  its  high  dig- 
nity and  original  purity,  in  order  that  the  poor 
masses  may  not  fall  a  prey  to  the  deceits  of  the 
fashionable  preachers  and  thereby  millions  of 
good  subjects  be  robbed  of  peace  during  life  and 
comfort  in  death.  Therefore  "as  overlord  and 
sole  lawgiver  in  our  states  we  order  and  command 
that  henceforward  no  minister,  preacher  or  school 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        159 

teacher  shall  make  himself  guilty  of  these  and 
other  errors  by  daring  to  teach  them  publicly  or 
privately  in  the  performance  of  his  duties  or 
otherwise,  under  penalty  of  certain  dismissal  and, 
according  to  the  circumstances,  of  still  more  se- 
vere punishment  and  retribution.  There  must  be 
a  universal,  unchangeable  standard,  norm  and 
rule  of  church  doctrine,  and  we  have  firmly  de- 
termined on  the  maintenance  of  this  unalterable 
ordinance,  nevertheless  we  freely  concede  to  min- 
isters the  same  freedom  of  conscience  as  to  our 
other  subjects,  and  are  far  from  desirous  of  ex- 
ercising constraint  upon  their  inner  convictions." 
Any  teacher  holding  other  views  must  therefore 
resign  his  position,  or  if  he  remains,  as  he  may, 
he  must  be  true  in  his  teaching  to  the  doctrine  of 
his  church.  This  remarkable  edict  was  every- 
where resented,  as  one  German  scholar  says,28  not 
because  of  the  reaction  it  displayed  against  the 
theology  of  the  Enlightenment,  nor  because  the 
government  ventured  to  interfere  in  the  matters 
of  doctrine  or  the  regulation  of  the  teaching  and 
conduct  of  some  preachers  of  the  new  school. 
Such  interference  was  quite  in  keeping  with  the 
spirit  of  the  times.  In  half  a  dozen  other  German 
states  similar  action  was  taken.  But  "that  in  the 
land  of  Frederick  the  Great,  in  the  metropolis  of 
the  Enlightenment,  and  after  the  domination  of 
exactly  the  opposite  views  and  governmental 

28  Carl  Mirbt  in  RE,  xxi,  431. 


160        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

principles  for  nearly  half  a  century,  without  con- 
sideration of  the  customary  rights  of  the  church 
or  of  the  right  of  historical  development,  without 
consultation  with  the  church  courts  or  with  the 
ecclesiastical  and  theological  administrative  offi- 
cers, by  royal  cabinet  order  threatening  even  dis- 
missal and  still  more  severe  punishment,  not  only 
preachers  and  teachers  received  a  prescribed  norm 
after  which  to  model  their  official  and  unofficial 
utterances  but  also  every  good  citizen  was  en- 
joined to  keep  his  private  views  to  himself  and 
carefully  to  refrain  from  making  them  known 
or  commending  them  to  others — this  was  very 
widely  felt  to  be  an  unprecedented  presumption. 
In  addition  to  this  there  was  the  crying  contrast 
between  the  austerity  of  the  edict  with  its  half 
pedantical  and  half  unctuous  tone  and  the  im- 
morality of  the  prince  whose  name  it  bore."  In 
other  words,  the  interference  of  the  king  was  re- 
garded as  perfectly  legal,  he  was  the  "sole  law- 
giver" to  use  his  own  words,  and  as  in  accord  with 
princely  methods.  Only  the  manner  in  which  he 
acted,  neglecting  the  custom  of  first  consulting 
the  church  leaders,  a  custom  that  had  no  basis  in 
law  though  defended  by  some  ecclesiastical  writ- 
ers as  required  by  the  divine  institution,  and  the 
gross  inconsistency  of  his  acts  with  his  edict  were 
open  to  criticism.  He  had  violated  good  taste 
rather  than  the  law. 

The  attempts  to  enforce  the  edict  were  of  the 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        161 

same  nature.  Protests,  and  requests  for  an  elu- 
cidation of  the  edict,  from  the  members  of  the 
Superior  Consistorial  Council  and  other  digni- 
taries of  the  churches  were  brusquely  set  aside, 
new  text  books  were  prepared  or  planned  for  the 
instruction  of  the  laity  and  candidates  for  the 
ministry,  and  a  Commission  for  Immediate  Ex- 
amination was  appointed  to  enforce  the  regula- 
tions of  the  edict  and  supervise  religious  instruc- 
tion and  religious  affairs  generally.  This  com- 
mission was  charged  among  other  things  with 
keeping  a  list,  or  rather  two  lists  of  the  preachers 
and  teachers,  one  containing  the  names  of  the 
orthodox,  the  other  the  names  of  all  those  that 
had  adopted  the  new  views  or  through  teaching 
or  manner  of  life  were  injurious.  A  watchful 
eye  was  to  be  kept  on  those  on  the  first  list,  ad- 
monitions and  dismissals  were  to  be  the  lot  of 
those  on  the  second. 

In  spite  of  threats,  however,  and  the  extraor- 
dinary powers  of  the  commission  little  could  be 
accomplished.  A  few  pamphleteers  had  been 
thrown  into  prison  immediately  after  the  publi- 
cation of  the  edict,  but  the  inquisition  for  hereti- 
cal preachers  was  almost  without  result.  One  pas- 
tor was  deposed  for  immorality,  and  another 
because  he  gave  offence  not  only  by  the  violence 
with  which  he  attacked  dogmas  of  the  church,  but 
also  by  the  manner  in  which  he  combed  his  hair. 
Interference  with  the  freedom  of  the  University 


162        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

of  Halle  was  resented  by  both  students  and  fac- 
ulty. The  students  drove  the  visiting  commis- 
sion out  of  the  town,  and  the  theological  profes- 
sors, after  suffering  much  annoyance,  appealed 
successfully  for  relief  to  the  State  Council  as  the 
highest  court  of  appeal.  "They  say  we  are 
powerful,"29  said  one  of  the  members  of  the 
commission,  "but  we  have  been  unable  to  depose 
a  single  preacher  of  the  new  doctrine;  everything 
works  against  us."  At  the  same  time  it  was  only 
after  the  death  of  the  king  that  this  attempt  to 
coerce  the  church  and  mould  the  consciences  of 
his  subjects  was  abandoned. 

Rieker,30  a  most  ardent  modern  defender  of 
the  establishment,  consistently  defends  the  Edict, 
pointing  out  that  it  and  not  the  Land  Law  first 
placed  the  three  great  confessions  on  an  equal 
footing  in  the  kingdom,  and  that  the  restriction 
of  freedom  in  teaching  was  necessary  because 
preachers  were  using  the  pulpit  to  decry  the  very 
doctrines  they  had  promised  to  proclaim,  and  to 
flout  all  positive  religion.  This  is  all  true.  From 
the  standpoint  of  morals  and  religion  some  ac- 
tion was  necessary  and  from  the  standpoint  of 
law  the  king  was  justified  in  acting  as  he  did. 
The  remarkable  things  about  it  are  that  such  star 
chamber  methods  could  have  been  used  at  the 
dawn  of  the  nineteenth  century  without  calling 


29  RE,  xxi,  434. 
80  P.  313  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        163 

forth  more  opposition  than  they  did,  and  that  the 
lesson  taught  by  them,  and  universally  recognized 
elsewhere  in  Protestant  countries,  namely  that 
coercion  in  matters  of  religion  must  fail  of  its 
object,  had  not  yet  been  learned  in  Germany. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

Frederick  William  II's  attempt  to  club  the 
church  into  submission  failed.  His  successor 
tried  the  rapierlike  methods  of  diplomacy  and 
was  successful.  In  many  respects  the  reign  of 
Frederick  William  III  (1797-1840)  was  one  of 
the  most  important  in  the  history  of  Prussia,  both 
politically  and  ecclesiastically.  Degraded  by  the 
Napoleonic  victories  and  brought  to  a  sense  of  its 
shame  by  the  Treaty  of  Tilsit,  which  robbed  it  of 
half  its  territory  and  left  it  helpless  in  the  hands 
of  the  Emperor  of  the  French,  the  proud  monar- 
chy recovered  in  time  to  play  a  respectable  part 
in  the  later  phases  of  the  war,  and  in  the  treaty 
which  reestablished  the  peace  of  Europe  received 
back  more  than  its  original  possessions.  The  rest 
of  the  reign  was  devoted  to  making  good  the  rav- 
ages of  war,  unifying  and  consolidating  the 
kingdom  along  the  lines  laid  down  by  Frederick 
the  Great  and  the  Prussian  Land  Law. 

The  French  Revolution  had  been  accompanied 
in  Germany  as  elsewhere  by  the  assertion  of  the 
rights  of  man  and  a  widespread  demand  for  po- 
litical reform.  In  the  year  1815  the  king  had 

164 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        165 

yielded  to  this  demand  by  promising  a  constitu- 
tion, but  to  the  great  disappointment  of  his  sub- 
jects he  did  not  see  fit  to  grant  it  after  peace  was 
declared.  On  the  contrary,  he  and  his  ministers, 
being  persuaded  that  the  country  was  not  yet 
ready  for  such  a  measure,  opposed  it  by  every 
means  in  their  power.  Other  German  states  were 
forced  to  grant  some  share  in  the  government  to 
the  people,  but  Prussia,  in  spite  of  such  examples 
outside  and  continual  agitation  within  its  own 
borders,  was  able  to  remain  an  absolute  monarchy 
until  1851.  It  is  necessary  to  have  this  political 
condition  in  mind  as  we  read  the  story  of  the  con- 
flict between  the  king  and  the  churches,  for  the 
orders  and  measures  taken  by  the  king  and  his 
ministers  were  always  considered  in  relation  to 
the  popular  desire  for  freedom.1  "I  am  becoming 
more  and  more  convinced,"  said  Altenstein  the 
minister  for  ecclesiastical  affairs,  "though  I  am 
not  able  to  prove  it,  that  the  political  movements 
seek  to  ally  themselves  with  the  religious." 

To  what  extent  the  subjection  of  the  church  to 
the  royal  will  assisted  in  postponing  the  civil  con- 
stitution it  is  of  course  impossible  to  say.  But 
judging  from  the  analogy  of  other  Protestant 
countries  where  political  freedom  was  the  result 
of  the  spirit  of  freedom  inculcated  by  religion,  it 
is  safe  to  say  that  the  subservience  of  the  clergy 
as  a  whole  which  was  effected  to  a  greater  extent 

1  Foerster,  ii,  233. 


166        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

in  this  reign  than  before  played  a  proportionate 
part  in  keeping  the  people  submissive.  Religious 
forces  had  comparatively  little  to  do  with  the 
uprising  in  1848  which  led  to  the  granting  of  a 
constitution.  That  the  king  was  not  unmindful 
of  the  political  influence  exercised  by  the  preach- 
ers is  evident  from  the  terms  of  the  oath  he  sought 
to  impose  upon  them:2  "In  like  manner  I  prom- 
ise to  be  true  to  my  legal  king,  his  majesty  the 
king  of  Prussia,  my  most  high  and  mighty  terri- 
torial ruler  and  supreme  bishop,  and  will  seek 
and  advance  the  king's  interests  and  good  in 
every  way.  With  life  and  blood,  with  doctrine 
and  example,  with  word  and  deed,  I  will  defend 
the  royal  power  and  dignity  as  it  is  established 
in  our  wholesome  monarchical  form  of  govern- 
ment. Likewise  I  will  make  it  known  in  good 
time,  if  I  discover  anything  aiming  at  the  altera- 
tion or  abolition  of  this  excellent  fundamental 
constitution,  in  which  the  welfare  of  the  state  has 
subsisted  and  subsists,  and  to  which  I  promise 
conformity  and  obedience  in  all  particulars.  In 
like  manner,  as  much  as  in  me  is,  I  will  render 
obedience  to  his  Royal  Majesty  my  most  gra- 
cious king,  and  to  those  who  have  the  right  to 
command  and  rule  in  his  name;  and  I  will  ad- 
monish my  parishioners  and  the  members  of  my 
congregation  to  think  and  speak  rightly,  at  all 
times,  of  the  secular  authority  which  is  ordained 
2  Foerster,  ii,  64. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        167 

of  God."  With  this  oath  the  king  endeavored  to 
bind  all  Protestant  preachers  of  the  kingdom,  not 
only  to  a  loyalty  to  the  state  but  even  to  the  par- 
ticular form  of  government,  the  absolutism,  which 
he  had  promised  to  surrender.  It  would  be  hard 
to  conceive  of  a  more  flagrant  attempt  to  subject 
the  church  to  the  interests  of  a  political  system,  or 
of  a  more  powerful  weapon  in  the  hands  of  the 
king  if  the  attempt  had  been  successful.  That 
it  was  not  finally  insisted  upon  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  such  an  oath  had  never  before  been  required 
of  preachers  in  Germany,  rather  than  to  the  feel- 
ing that  its  contents  were  at  variance  or  might  be 
at  variance  with  the  duties  of  a  minister  to  the 
church.3 

It  is  not  to  be  deduced  from  this  that  the  king's 
interest  in  the  church  and  the  clergy  was  entirely 
political.  Indeed  exactly  the  opposite  is  true. 
Frederick  William  had  received  and  responded  to 
a  careful  religious  training,  and  from  the  begin- 
ning of  his  reign  showed  a  desire  to  depart  from 
the  laissez  f  aire  policy  of  Frederick  the  Great  and 
the  Prussian  Land  Law  and  to  return  to  the  atti- 
tude of  the  earlier  members  of  his  house  who  re- 
garded it  as  a  sacred  duty  to  promote  religion 
and  exercise  the  jus  episcopale. 

To  his  mind  and  to  the  mind  of  all  observers 
some  action  was  necessary  to  preserve  the  Chris- 

3  The  report  of  the  Royal  Commission  is  printed  in 
Foerster,  ii,  426  ff. 


168        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tian  religion  from  falling  a  prey  to  the  superficial 
rationalism  of  the  time.  The  drastic  measures  of 
his  predecessor  had  had  no  effect.  Individual 
churches  and  individual  preachers  persisted  in 
going  each  his  own  way  within  the  limits  allowed 
by  the  Land  Law  and  the  extremely  tolerant 
principles  of  Frederick  the  Great.  The  old  de- 
nominationalism  was  dead,  or  at  least  appeared 
to  be,  although  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  churches 
still  stood  side  by  side  each  with  its  own  symboli- 
cal books  and  organization.  Even  the  doctrines 
common  to  both  were  frequently  conspicuous  by 
their  absence  from  the  sermons  of  the  preachers, 
who  satisfied  themselves  and  apparently  their 
congregations  with  moral  homilies  or  more  or  less 
veiled  attacks  upon  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
the  church.  The  upper  classes  openly  shrugged 
their  shoulders  at  the  mention  of  religion,  and  it 
was  feared  that  the  peasants,  ever  prone  to  ape 
their  superiors,  might  soon  learn  to  do  the  same. 

The  clergy  for  the  most  part  were  drawn  from 
the  lower  classes,  badly  educated  and  miserably 
paid — conditions  intensified  by  the  ravages  of  the 
Napoleonic  war.  Those  in  the  city  were  better 
provided  for,  but  the  country  pastor,  by  uniting 
the  income  from  salary  and  incidental  fees,  and 
working  his  glebe,  was  frequently  unable  to  live 
decently,  or  was  dependent  upon  the  charity  of 
his  patron  or  other  neighboring  gentry.  Schleier- 
macher4  reports  in  addition  that  many  of  them 

4  Quoted  by  Foerster,  i,  90. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        169 

"cared  neither  for  religion  or  their  office  and  made 
themselves  obnoxious  by  their  incapacity,  their 
immorality  and  their  coarseness." 

Moreover,  the  organization  of  the  churches  was 
not  satisfactory.  Although  the  Land  Law  con- 
templated each  congregation,  as  an  association 
of  voluntary  members  with  certain  rights  and 
privileges,  most  Lutheran  churches  had  no  con- 
gregational organization,  while  both  the  Lu- 
therans everywhere  and  Calvinists  in  the  older 
parts  of  the  kingdom  were  governed  and  con- 
trolled by  consistories  and  directories  which  had 
come  into  existence  as  occasion  demanded,  and 
had  no  bond  of  connection  save  a  common  re- 
sponsibility to  the  crown. 

To  add  to  the  confusion  there  was  great  uncer- 
tainty concerning  the  theory  of  church  govern- 
ment and  the  relation  of  church  to  state.  The 
political  aspirations  toward  freedom  gave  new 
impetus  to  the  collegiate  theory,  the  superiority 
of  the  presbyterian  system  was  acknowledged 
now  when  doctrinal  differences  no  longer  ob- 
scured the  fact,  and  the  success  of  the  free  and 
independent  churches  in  England  and  especially 
in  America  was  held  up  as  proof  of  the  church's 
ability  to  stand  alone.  The  establishment  of  free 
and  independent  churches  was  both  advocated 
and  expected  in  the  near  future.  Schleiermacher 
was  one  of  the  foremost  champions  of  freedom, 
and,  although  he  altered  the  details  of  his  pro- 


170        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

posed  system,  remained  always  true  to  the  con- 
ception of  a  church  organized  from  the  bottom 
up,  and  free  from  interference  by  the  monarch 
or  the  state.  He  protested  against  enforced  uni- 
formity in  either  creed  or  liturgy,  against  com- 
pulsory church  membership,  and  indeed  against 
all  compulsion  in  religious  matters,  which  he  re- 
garded as  only  part  of  a  larger  evil,  namely,  the 
bureaucratic  military  absolute  monarchy.  He 
wished  the  church  to  be  free,  and  the  common  peo- 
ple to  feel  that  it  belonged  to  them,  not  that  it  was 
a  yoke  imposed  upon  them.5 

The  most  decided  opponent  of  the  more  liberal 
views,  however,  was  the  king  himself,  who,  al- 
though continually  protesting  that  he  would  do 
nothing  to  force  men's  consciences,  ruled  the 
church  as  absolutely  as  he  ruled  the  state,  by 
means  of  cabinet  orders,  and  the  skilful  machina- 
tions of  his  ministers.  One  of  these,  Altenstein,6 
reviewing  his  long  term  of  service,  offers  this  ex- 
planation of  his  behavior:  "I  have  served  your 
Royal  Majesty  with  the  most  perfect  devotion. 
Not  only  that  I  have  consecrated  all  my  powers 
in  their  full  strength  to  your  service  and  loyally 
subordinated  myself  to  your  will — it  is  my  chief 
joy  that  I  have  revered  in  your  Majesty  the  de- 
terminate instrument  of  divine  providence  whose 
utterances  became  my  convictions  when  my  own 

5  See  the  passages  cited  by  Foerster,  i,  159;  ii,  24*. 

6  Foerster,  ii,  315. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        171 

intentions  led  me  in  another  direction  or  on  an- 
other course."7  And  this  is  the  only  justification 
that  may  be  offered.  When  even  such  loyalty  as 
this  indicates  failed  to  find  a  justification  for  the 
king's  proposals,  the  learning  and  sophistry  of 
others  was  drawn  upon,  and  when  all  else  failed 
there  remained  as  a  last  resort  the  royal  cabinet 
order  against  which  none  dared  to  protest. 

Professor  Augusti  of  Bonn  revived  in  defence 
of  the  king  the  old  territorial  theory,  stating  it 
more  crassly  than  earlier  writers  had  ventured  to 
do,  namely,  that  as  the  government  of  the  church 
is  by  nature  a  prerogative  of  the  territorial  prince, 
he  may,  even  though  he  be  a  heathen  or  a  Turk, 
exercise  it  perfectly  arbitrarily.  A  minister  of 
state,  Von  Kamptz,8  prepared  an  equally  good 
defence  on  the  basis  of  the  episcopal  theory.  The 
Protestant  princes  of  Germany,  he  maintained, 
are  the  legal  successors  of  the  bishops  and  possess 
full  episcopal  powers.  The  point  of  this  being 
that  in  his  capacity  of  civil  ruler  the  king  might 
be  bound  to  observe  the  law  but  as  bishop  he  was 
not  responsible  nor  bound  by  any  political  or 
legal  restrictions. 

If  the  territorial  and  episcopal  theories  were 
not  adequate,  appeal  could  be  made  to  the  meth- 
ods and  principles  of  the  reformers  and  the 
princes  of  their  time.  Thus  an  opinion  of  the 

7  Foerster,  ii,  82. 

8  Foerster,  ii,  84,. 


172        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Ministry  for  Ecclesiastical  Affairs9  declared  that 
although  there  were  serious  objections  to  the  im- 
position of  a  liturgy  by  the  king  in  his  capacity 
of  civil  ruler  or  bishop,  nevertheless,  as  a  member 
of  the  church,  as  a  membrum  praecipuum,  he  had 
the  right  to  suggest  and  commend  alterations  and 
to  use  all  the  advantages  of  his  position  as  king 
to  secure  their  adoption  by  the  churches,  only  he 
must  not  positively  command  their  introduction. 
The  problem  in  this  case  was  how  to  get  around 
I  the  very  definite  statement  of  the  Land  Law  that 
the  church  associations  had  the  right  to  regulate 
their  own  services,  the  state  retaining  only  the 
right  of  veto.  The  opinion  of  the  ministry  found 
a  way  for  the  king  legally  to  introduce  innova- 
tions, but  not  to  enforce  them.  A  little  later, 
however,  and  in  another  connection,  Altenstein10 
found  a  satisfactory  solution.  The  church  he  said 
undoubtedly  has  full  liberty  in  matters  of  doc- 
trine and  worship.  But  how  does  the  church  ex- 
press itself?  Not  through  individual  members  for 
they  are  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  church, 
and  not  through  its  courts  for  they  are  notori- 
ously incapable.  It  expresses  itself  through  the 
Christian  ruler  who  since  the  Reformation  has 
been  its  only  proper  organ  of  expression.  "The 
decision  of  an  evangelical  territorial  ruler,  who 
with  pious  mind  and  serious  purpose  has  in- 

9  The  opinion  is  printed  in  Foerster,  ii,  394>  ff. 
10Foerster,  ii,  216. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        173 

quired  into  the  needs  of  the  church,  and  gath- 
ered experience  on  every  side,  has  always  been 
the  most  certain  attestation  of  new  institutions 
in  the  evangelical  church  and  especially  in 
Prussia  from  the  very  beginning  of  the  Re- 
formation until  today."  To  this  there  is  no  re- 
ply ;  it  is  in  accord  with  both  history  and  law,  and 
leaves  the  German  prince  in  absolute  control 
of  the  church  in  the  nineteenth  as  well  as  in  the 
sixteenth  century.  Indeed  more  so,  for  whereas 
formerly  his  activity  had  been  controlled  to  some 
extent  by  the  diets,  and  exercised  in  consultation 
and  agreement  with  the  clergy,  Frederick  Wil- 
liam III  went  his  own  way  without  conceding  any 
share  in  the  government  to  either.  A  few  writers 
advised  that  ecclesiastical  affairs  like  others 
should  be  laid  before  the  diets  and  regulated  by 
law,  but  they  found  no  supporters. 

The  first  change  of  any  importance  in  church 
affairs  was  the  abolition  of  the  consistories  and 
other  church  courts  in  1808,  and  the  immediate 
subordination  of  the  church  to  the  government  in 
the  several  provinces  and  the  capital.  This  was 
not  so  much  the  work  of  the  king  as  of  his  great 
minister  Stein  who  intended  thereby  to  use  the 
church  more  effectually  in  arousing  the  humili- 
ated nation  and  organizing  it  for  the  prospective 
war  with  France.  His  plan  contemplated  also 
the  organization  of  the  congregations  with  a  view 
to  self-government,  the  abolition  or  at  least  the 


174        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

amelioration  of  patronage,  and  the  betterment  of 
the  financial  condition  of  the  clergy. 

These  more  liberal  reforms,  affecting  the  com- 
mon life  of  the  church,  remained  unfulfilled.  The 
changes  made,  however,  were  of  great  impor- 
tance. They  did  not  involve  the  surrender  of  the 
churches'  liberties  to  the  state,  for  the  abolished 
courts  had  been  quite  as  much  the  creatures  of  the 
state  as  the  new  ones.  But  they  made  it  possible 
for  the  state  to  control  and  direct  the  churches 
more  immediately,  and,  what  was  of  equal  im- 
portance, they  united  the  government  of  the  three 
churches11  in  one  office.  Regarded  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  churches  it  could  not  be  called 
a  church  union,  for  each  denomination  besides  its 
own  separate  consciousness  retained  its  peculiar 
creeds,  liturgies  and  domestic  laws.  From  the 
standpoint  of  the  state  it  was  a  constitutional 
union,  the  extent  and  results  of  which  depended 
largely  upon  the  king  and  his  advisers. 

Frederick  William  Ill's  religious  interests  did 
not  run  in  the  direction  of  doctrine.  Like  many 
of  his  ancestors  he  regarded  the  theological  differ- 
ences which  divided  his  subjects  as  of  no  impor- 
tance. But  he  was  moral  and  serious  in  his  reli- 
gious views,  reflecting  the  romantic  and  emotional 
spirit  of  his  time  in  his  admiration  for  the  ref orm- 

11  The  Lutheran,  the  Reformed  or  Calvinistic,  and  the 
French  Reformed  churches;  the  first  two  being  also  sub- 
divided. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        175 

ers  and  his  interest  in  the  outward  forms  of  wor- 
ship. Like  his  predecessors  he  desired  greatly  to 
bring  about  an  organic  union  of  the  Protestant 
churches,  but  felt  himself  debarred  from  doing  so 
by  the  freedom  of  conscience  guaranteed  to  all. 
He  saw  no  objection,  however,  to  his  effecting 
a  more  kindly  attitude  of  the  Lutherans  and  Cal- 
vinists  toward  each  other  especially  in  respect  to 
admitting  each  other  to  their  respective  commun- 
ion services,  nor  to  his  introduction  of  a  uniform 
liturgy  in  all  the  Protestant  churches  of  whatever 
faith,  nor  to  the  establishment  of  the  episcopal 
system  of  church  government.  This  was  his  pro- 
gram and  in  attempting  to  carry  it  out  he  actually 
brought  about  church  union. 

The  first  step  was  taken  in  connection  with  the 
celebration  of  the  Reformation  in  1817,  when  the 
king  urged  that  doctrinal  differences  be  laid  aside 
and  that  both  branches  of  the  Protestant  church 
unite  in  partaking  together  the  Lord's  Supper  in 
a  spirit  of  brotherly  love  and  Christian  charity. 
The  suggestion  was  hailed  with  delight  in  Berlin 
and  elsewhere,  for  indeed  the  time  was  ripe.  The 
former  theological  differences  had  almost  entirely 
disappeared  from  the  pulpits,  Pietism  and  Ra- 
tionalism had  undermined  the  denominational  ex- 
clusiveness,  and  the  common  experiences  of  the 
French  wars  had  created  a  feeling  of  unity  and 
solidarity  among  the  people  generally.  The  king 
personally  supervised  the  preparation  of  the 


176        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

liturgy  for  the  occasion  and  on  the  30th  and  31st 
of  October  the  churches  would  not  contain  the 
throngs  of  Lutherans  and  Calvinists  that  pre- 
sented themselves  together  for  the  communion. 
The  same  thing  occurred  in  all  the  larger  towns 
and  in  smaller  places.  In  many,  steps  were  even 
taken  to  complete  a  real  union  by  the  consolida- 
tion of  church  property,  schools  and  religious 
services.  The  Calvinists,  who  had  never  been  so 
exclusive  as  the  Lutherans,  were  the  most  ready 
to  accept  the  union;  among  the  Lutherans  there 
was  an  unknown  number  that  would  have  nothing 
to  do  with  it. 

In  view  of  the  favorable  reception  of  this  first 
suggestion  of  the  king's,  much  was  expected 
from  the  provincial  synods  of  the  following  year 
in  which  Lutherans  and  Calvinists  for  the  first 
time  deliberated  together  over  the  common  needs 
of  the  Protestant  church.  And  indeed  almost  all 
the  synods  showed  themselves  well  disposed  to- 
ward the  principle  of  union  though  differing  in 
regard  to  the  manner  and  time  of  its  consumma- 
tion. They  gave  much  time  to  the  consideration 
of  the  constitution  of  the  new  church  and  were 
agreed  that  a  greater  amount  of  freedom  of 
action  and  authority,  if  not  complete  liberty,  be 
accorded  it.12  They  demanded  that  a  general 

12  Troeltsch,  Kultur  der  Gegenwart,  I,  iv,  437,  criticizes 
them  for  giving  preference  to  constitutional  questions,  but 
it  is  difficult  to  see  how  they  could  have  done  otherwise,  or 
how  they  could  have  entered  con  amore  into  the  real  prob- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        177 

synod  be  called  where  representatives  from  every 
part  of  the  kingdom  might  discuss  the  matter  in 
all  its  bearings. 

These  demands,  however,  only  angered  the 
king  and  his  ministers,  who,  alarmed  afresh  by 
the  Wartburgfest  at  which  some  students  had 
given  expression  to  the  liberal  feeling  of  the  day 
by  emblematically  committing  the  government 
to  the  flames,  were  more  determined  than  before 
to  maintain  the  absolute  rule  of  the  monarch. 
Like  James  I  of  England  the  king  thought  rep- 
resentative institutions  in  the  church  did  not 
agree  with  monarchy  in  the  state,13  and  one  of 
his  high  officials  the  president  of  the  province  of 
Saxony  characterized  the  demands  of  the  clergy 
as  "nothing  but  another  attempt  to  realize  the 
ancient  ambition  of  the  clergy,  to  release  the 
priesthood,  falsely  called  the  church,  as  much  as 
possible  from  the  control  of  the  state,  and  so  to 
create  a  state  within  the  state."  Compulsion  there 
certainly  should  be  in  the  church  but  it  should  be 
exercised  by  the  state  and  not  by  the  clergy.  He 
advised  a  stronger  supervision  of  the  preachers 
and  of  doctrine.  Another  critic  proved  from 
Luther's  writings  that  the  only  power  committed 
to  the  church  was  that  of  preaching  the  Word, 
compulsion  of  any  kind  could  be  exercised  only 

lem  of  the  religious  life  of  the  people  without  some  assur- 
ance that  they  would  be  allowed  to  put  their  plans  into 
operation. 

13  Foerster,  ii,  235. 


178        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

by  the  state.  Consequently  the  general  synod 
which  might  show  an  obstreperous  spirit,  al- 
though promised,  was  never  called  together;  the 
provincial  synods  were  disregarded,  and  the  pres- 
byteries14 in  so  far  as  they  had  been  organized 
were  allowed  quietly  to  die.  The  church  was  to 
be  ruled  entirely  from  above  and  the  union  to  be 
effected  in  this  way,  if  at  all. 

The  king's  own  wish  was  to  introduce  episco- 
pacy, but  in  this  he  encountered  much  opposition. 
Professor  Augusti  indeed  enthusiastically  sup- 
ported him  but  others  pointed  out  that  the  recog- 
nition of  any  difference  of  degree  in  the  consecra- 
tion of  ministers  was  directly  contrary  to  Lu- 
ther's teaching  and  that  any  attempt  to  introduce 
an  episcopacy  involving  such  a  difference  would 
result  in  a  large  part  of  the  Lutheran  church  and 
the  whole  of  the  Reformed  church  withdrawing 
from  the  communion.  Against  the  establishment 
of  an  episcopacy  not  involving  any  departure 
from  Luther's  principles,  which  could  easily  be 
done  for  instance  by  naming  the  superintendents 
bishops  and  the  general  superintendents  arch- 
bishops, there  was  not  so  much  objection  but  it 
was  pointed  out  that  it  would  give  the  Roman 
Catholics  an  occasion  for  mockery. 

14  Presbytery  is  the  name  given  to  the  organized  body  of 
elders  within  a  congregation,  and  must  not  be  confused 
with  the  use  of  the  word  in  the  English  speaking  Presby- 
terian churches. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        179 

The  king  was  obviously  impressed  with  the 
necessity  of  avoiding  anything  in  contravention 
to  Luther's  teaching  for  he  did  not  attempt  to 
introduce  degrees  in  the  clerical  order,  but  he 
nevertheless  created  several  bishops  and  arch- 
bishops and  designed  himself  the  dress  they 
should  wear — a  silk  gown  and  a  golden  cross.  The 
office,  however,  was  little  more  than  honorary,  a 
mark  of  the  distinguished  favor  of  the  king,  al- 
though its  inmates  were  given  a  seat  in  the  pro- 
vincial consistory  where  they  were  able  to  sup- 
port the  general  superintendents.  It  was  rather 
by  these  latter,  one  of  whom  was  appointed  with 
very  wide  supervisory  powers  in  every  province, 
in  1830,  that  the  king  was  enabled  to  keep  in  im- 
mediate touch  with  the  churches  and  enforce  his 
will  from  one  end  of  the  kingdom  to  the  other.15 

That  which  lay  nearest  the  king's  heart,  how- 
ever, was  the  new  liturgy  which  he  had  himself 
written  and  was  determined  to  introduce  into 
every  Protestant  church  of  the  kingdom.  In 
preparing  it  he  had  drawn  from  the  old  German 
liturgies,  especially  those  of  the  Reformation, 
many  of  which  differed  only  slightly  from  the 
Roman  Catholic  mass,  and  also  from  those  used 
in  England  and  Sweden.  It  contained  regula- 
tions in  respect  to  the  length  of  the  services,  the 
arrangement  of  the  altar,  the  formation  of  choirs, 
forms  of  worship  for  the  service  on  Sundays  and 

15  See  the  instructions  in  Foerster,  ii,  223,  470  ff. 


180        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

holy  days,  for  the  communion  and  preparatory 
services,  for  baptism  and  marriage,  also  the  Apos- 
tles', Nicene  and  Athanasian  Creeds,  a  cate- 
chism and  prayers,  to  which  was  added  a  little 
later  forms  for  ordination,  confirmation,  com- 
munion and  burial.  It  involved  the  introduction 
of  an  altar,  if  possible  with  a  rail,  candles,  crucifix, 
the  sign  of  the  cross,  kneeling,  choral  responses, 
etc.  Uniform  dress,  of  a  design  chosen  by  the 
king,  had  already  been  commanded. 

The  liturgy  }vas  put  into  use  immediately 
(1822)  in  all  churches  and  institutions  directly 
under  the  king  with  the  command  that  the  officiat- 
ing minister  should  not  depart  from  it  in  the 
slightest  particular.  A  copy  was  sent  to  every 
minister  of  the  kingdom  with  a  royal  commenda- 
tion, and  the  promise  that  those  churches  in 
which  it  was  introduced  should  receive  a  copy 
from  his  majesty  as  a  memorial  of  the  happy 
occasion. 

In  spite  of  such  inducements  not  one  minister 
in  sixteen  was  willing  to  use  it.  Objections  came 
from  almost  every  quarter,  that  it  resembled  the 
Roman  mass,  that  the  time  for  preaching  and  con- 
gregational singing  was  too  short,  that  uniform- 
ity was  neither  necessary  nor  advisable,  that  the 
proposed  liturgy  contained  some  dogmatical 
statements  which  were  peculiarly  Calvinistic  and 
some  that  were  peculiarly  Lutheran,  and  there- 
fore interfered  with  freedom  of  conscience,  and 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        181 

that  the  king  had  no  right  to  interfere  in  such 
matters  anyway.  A  lively  literary  discussion 
arose  in  which  the  matter  was  reviewed  from 
every  angle. 

The  king,  however,  was  unmoved  by  criticism. 
The  most  serious  objections  he  characterized  as 
idle  chatter.16  He  refused  to  receive  the  repre- 
sentatives of  a  committee  of  clergymen,  the  only 
ones  with  experience  in  such  matters,  and  even 
forbade  their  discussing  it  in  synods,  or  writing 
against  it.  On  the  other  hand  he  promised  hand- 
somely bound  copies  to  all  superintendents  intro- 
ducing it  in  their  dioceses,  presented  crucifixes, 
candlesticks  and  other  such  things  to  the  churches 
which  had  accepted  it,  spread  broadcast  the  de- 
fence of  his  action  by  Professor  Augusti,  and  in 
general  endeavored  by  every  possible  means, 
short  of  a  categorical  command,  to  secure  its 
adoption  and  use. 

The  nature  of  the  opposition  and  the  way  it 
was  overcome  is  well  illustrated  by  the  events  in 
Berlin.  The  ministers  in  two  of  the  churches  de- 
clared their  readiness  to  introduce  the  liturgy 
and  received  in  recognition  of  their  zeal  two  copies 
of  it  as  a  present  from  the  king.  As  the  congre- 
gations, however,  had  not  been  consulted,  and  as 
it  was  definitely  stated  in  the  Land  Law  that 
church  associations  should  have  power  to  order 
their  own  services,  many  prominent  members 

16  Geschwatz,  Foerster,  ii,  97. 


182        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

who  did  not  favor  the  innovation  appealed  to  the 
mayor  of  the  city,  who  in  virtue  of  his  office  was 
patron  of  the  churches.  He  in  turn  accepted  the 
responsibility  and,  supported  by  the  city  council- 
lors, also  entered  a  protest  on  his  own  account  as 
patron  representing  in  well  informed  and  equally 
well  argued  remonstrances  that  the  action  of  the 
ministers  was  contrary  to  law,  that  in  the  interests 
of  true  piety  and  order,  if  for  no  other  reason, 
the  wishes  of  the  congregation  should  be  con- 
sulted, that  there  was  danger  of  some  of  the  mem- 
bers withdrawing  and  joining  a  church  where  the 
old  liturgy  was  still  in  use,  that  the  new  liturgy 
undoubtedly  contained  statements  which  implied 
the  acceptance  of  theological  doctrines  that  were 
still  debated  in  the  Protestant  churches  and  its 
enforced  use  therefore  a  violation  of  freedom  of 
conscience,  and  that  liturgical  uniformity  was 
neither  in  keeping  with  evangelical  doctrine  nor 
in  itself  desirable.  In  a  private  note  to  the  min- 
ister for  ecclesiastical  affairs  he  added:  "It  is  not 
in  keeping  with  the  spirit  of  the  evangelical 
church  to  recognize  in  it  any  head  of  the  church, 
except  in  so  far  as  worldly  things  are  concerned. 
About  this  there  should  be  clearly  no  difference 
of  opinion  in  a  state  whose  prince  belongs  to  the 
evangelical  church  and  especially  among  those 
that  confess  this  faith."17  But  his  remonstrance 
availed  nothing.  The  provincial  consistory  de- 
17  Foerster,  ii,  111. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        183 

clared  a  consultation  with  the  congregation  to  be 
not  feasible.  The  minister  for  ecclesiastical  af- 
fairs called  the  remonstrance  unpardonable,  and 
the  king  interpreted  the  passage  in  the  Land  Law 
appealed  to,  as  referring  only  to  police  regula- 
tions regarding  public  service  and  not  to  the  lit- 
urgy. The  minister  of  justice  interpreted  it 
otherwise  but  changed  his  opinion  when  shown 
the  king's  order.18 

To  the  complaint  that  the  imposition  of  the  new 
liturgy  was  a  violation  of  freedom  of  conscience 
the  king  replied,19  "The  liturgy  is  intended  only 
to  bring  about  uniformity  in  divine  worship  and 
to  call  again  to  life  that  which  has  been  in  the 
evengelical  churches  throughout  the  centuries,  so 
that  for  the  welfare  of  the  church  a  stop  will  be 
put  to  the  exercise  of  destructive  arbitrary  free- 
dom by  so  many  preachers.  It  has  nothing  to  do 
with  new  doctrine  or  forcing  the  conscience.  On 
the  contrary,  to  all  those  that  desire  Christian 
edification  it  offers  assurance  and  security  that 
evangelical  congregations  will  again  receive  out 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures  themselves  and  out  of  the 
old  liturgies  issued  by  my  revered  ancestors  that 
which  they  formerly  possessed,  and  which  care- 
less, misguided  caprice  has  taken  from  them  in 
great  measure,  thereby  severing  the  holy  bond  of 
spiritual  communion  in  the  church."  He  com- 

18  Foerster,  ii,  172. 

19  Foerster,  ii,  108 


184        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

manded  also  that  the  two  handsome  volumes 
which  he  had  presented  be  formally  returned  be- 
cause the  churches  by  "the  antagonistic  and  im- 
proper conduct  of  the  magistrate  their  patron, 
and  of  other  unauthorized  spokesmen  have  shown 
themselves  unworthy  of  the  royal  gift." 

The  incident  was  closed  by  a  letter  from  the 
mayor  in  which  he  expresses  sorrow  that  the  dis- 
favor of  the  king  has  fallen  on  him  and  finds  con- 
solation in  the  assurance  that  he  has  acted  only  in 
keeping  with  the  dictates  of  his  conscience  and  the 
duties  of  his  office.  So  the  liturgy  was  introduced 
with  comparative  ease  even  against  the  will  of  the 
congregation,  the  city  councillors  and  the  mayor 
of  the  capital  city  of  the  kingdom. 

Of  a  different  nature,  but  no  less  illuminating, 
was  the  conflict  with  those  ministers  of  Berlin 
who  did  not  accept  the  Liturgy.  There  were 
twelve  of  them,  one  being  Schleiermacher,  the 
most  respected  and  influential  divine  of  his  age. 
Schleiermacher  was  in  favor  of  union,  but  not  of 
a  union  consummated  by  force.  He  held  rather 
that  the  only  wholesome  and  practicable  method 
of  introducing  it  and  of  improving  the  spiritual 
life  generally  was  the  establishment  of  the  pres- 
byterian  system,  in  which  the  organized  congre- 
gations should  have  charge  of  their  own  affairs, 
and  representative  synods  should  control  and  di- 
rect the  larger  interests  of  the  church  without 
interference  from  above.  Angered  by  the  new 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        185 

liturgy  and  the  attempt  to  force  it  upon  the 
churches,  he  formulated  his  views  afresh  over  a 
pseudonym  and  used  the  occasion  to  criticize  se- 
verely the  personal  government  of  the  church  by 
the  king  and  his  ministers.  Not  many  of  the 
clergy,  however,  supported  him.  "Most  of  them 
yielded  with  broken  convictions  when  they  saw 
themselves  threatened  by  the  disfavor  of  the  king 
and  his  ministers."20  Schleiermacher's  associate 
in  Trinity  church,  and  fellow  professor  at  the 
University  of  Berlin,  Marheineke,  not  only 
yielded  but  wrote  a  personal  note  to  the  king  in 
which  he  stated  emphatically  that  the  king  had 
the  right  to  introduce  the  new  liturgy,  that  it  was 
the  duty  of  subjects  to  obey  in  this  as  in  other 
matters,  and  that  for  his  own  person  he  was  un- 
able to  judge  the  liturgy  and  confided  implicitly 
in  the  king's  judgment.  Such  a  declaration  from 
a  professor  in  the  leading  university  serves  to 
explain  the  readiness  with  which  those  in  less 
honorable  and  responsible  positions  yielded  to  the 
royal  demands. 

In  the  summer  of  1825  the  authorities  began  to 
apply  pressure  to  the  twelve  Berlin  ministers  in 
a  very  ingenious  way.  One  of  the  king's  advis- 
ers had  pointed  out  that  whereas  there  might  be 
some  doubt  of  the  legality  of  the  king's  action  in 
introducing  a  liturgy,  it  was  beyond  question  that 
only  those  liturgies  might  be  legally  used  which 

20  Foerster,  ii,  183. 


186        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

had  been  approved  by  the  state.  Following  this 
he  cleverly  suggested  that  it  might  be  advanta- 
geous to  inquire  into  the  origin  of  the  liturgies 
in  use  and  particularly  to  ascertain  whether  or 
not  they  had  received  official  approval.  If  they 
had  not,  then  the  offending  minister  should  be 
required  either  to  adhere  verbally  to  the  liturgy 
which  had  last  been  approved  for  his  church,  or, 
if  he  preferred,  to  adopt  the  king's.  It  would  be 
difficult  to  conceive  a  more  paltry  method  of 
treating  an  important  matter,  and  yet  it  was 
adopted.  During  the  previous  century  and  more, 
great  liberty  had  been  conceded  to  the  churches 
in  this  respect.  A  few  used  the  form  which  had 
been  introduced  in  the  time  of  the  Reformation, 
but  generally  alterations  and  innovations  had 
been  made  by  the  consistories,  the  superinten- 
dents and  even  the  local  pastors.  In  many  of  the 
Calvinistic  churches  indeed  there  was  no  set  form 
whatever. 

To  the  alternative  thus  presented  Schleier- 
macher  answered  that  the  liturgy  in  use  in  Trin- 
ity church  was  based  upon  an  ordinance  of  Fred- 
erick William  I  with  some  later  additions  which 
had  been  approved  by  the  consistory.  He  pro- 
posed to  leave  it  as  it  was  and  to  defend  it. 
Moreover,  he  reserved  the  right  to  use  it  freely 
and  without  servile  subjection  to  the  letter.  Were 
the  new  Romanizing  liturgy  introduced  every 
Calvinist  and  many  of  the  Lutheran  members  of 
the  congregation  would  regard  it  as  an  injury. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        187 

The  other  ministers  responded  in  a  joint  note 
in  which  they  protested  against  the  liturgy  itself 
and  the  manner  in  which  it  was  being  thrust  upon 
the  churches.  Resting  upon  Luther's  words  they 
declared  absolute  uniformity  to  be  out  of  har- 
mony with  evangelical  freedom.  Any  liturgy 
introduced  should  come  from  the  church  and  be 
approved  in  synod.  The  new  liturgy  was  defec- 
tive in  literary  style  and  theology,  and  not  in 
keeping  with  the  spirit  of  Protestantism.  In  an- 
swer to  the  argument  that  it  had  been  generally 
accepted  they  answered  that  many  ministers  had 
accepted  it  against  their  better  judgment  and  only 
when  threatened  by  the  king's  displeasure.  They 
sent  a  copy  of  their  protest  to  the  mayor  and  a 
little  later  had  it  published  in  Leipzig. 

The  king's  minister,  Altenstein,  found  himself 
in  a  very  uncomfortable  position.  The  twelve 
ministers  were  among  the  most  respected  in  the 
capital  and  any  action  taken  against  them  might 
occasion  an  uprising  or  at  least  an  expression  of 
sympathy  among  the  people  generally.  At  the 
same  time  he  regarded  their  attitude  toward  the 
liturgy  as  reprehensible,  and  the  publication  of 
their  protest  as  criminal.  He  decided  in  the  end 
that  it  would  be  best  not  to  inform  the  king  of  the 
incident  but  to  endeavor  by  private  conferences 
and  threats  to  bring  the  twelve  to  a  more  reas- 
onable attitude. 

They,  however,  on  learning  this,  appealed  di- 


Y 

188        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

rectly  to  the  king,  with  a  dignified  and  respectful 
petition  written  by  Schleiermacher,  in  which  they 
reviewed  the  whole  matter  in  very  much  the  same 
way  as  before.  But  if  they  expected  to  find  more 
favor  with  the  king  than  with  his  minister  they 
were  mistaken.  "Insolence,"  "contumacy,"  "im- 
pudence," "criminal  obstinacy,"  "foolishness," 
"silliness,"  "twaddle,"  are  some  of  the  marginal 
notes  with  which  he  transmitted  it  to  Altenstein,21 
who  agreed  or  at  least  said  he  agreed  perfectly 
with  his  master's  judgment  and  asked  and  re- 
ceived permission  to  handle  the  authors  himself. 

This  however  was  no  easier  than  before,  and  the 
matter  dragged  for  over  a  year.  Then  as  some 
action  was  made  necessary  by  continued  "contu- 
macy," it  was  decided  in  a  conference  of  four 
members  of  the  state  ministry,  one  of  whom  was 
the  minister  of  justice,  that  the  twelve  were  crim- 
inally guilty  in  three  points,  namely,  of  uniting  in 
their  remonstrance,  of  divulging  and  of  publish- 
ing it,  but  that  institution  of  criminal  proceedings 
was  not  advisable  because  of  the  uncertainty  of 
the  outcome.  Altenstein  feared  the  judges  would 
acquit  them,  and  with  the  king's  consent  decided 
that  the  punishment  should  take  the  form  of  a 
reprimand  in  which  the  ministers  were  informed 
that  they  had  committed  a  penal  offence — or 
rather  three  of  them — and  that  they  owed  it  to 
the  clemency  of  his  majesty  that  proceedings 

21  They  are  printed  in  full  in  Foerster,  ii,  423  ff. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        189 

were  not  taken  against  them.  If  their  future  be- 
havior did  not  display  a  better  knowledge  they 
would  be  prosecuted.  To  this  royal  admonition 
seven  of  the  twelve  thought  it  oest  to  yield,  though 
it  must  be  said  in  their  favor  that  about  the  same 
time  an  appendix  of  alternate  readings  was  prom- 
ised for  the  liturgy  which  rendered  it  less  ob- 
jectionable. 

Not  so  with  Schleiermacher,  however,  who  an- 
swered with  dignity  and  firmly  that  he  could  not 
recognize  his  guilt  in  the  matter,  that  he  had  only 
followed  the  dictates  of  his  conscience,  and  still 
adhered  to  his  former  statements.  If  these  did 
not  agree  with  the  views  of  the  king  and  his  ad- 
visers, he  permitted  himself  to  point  out  that  he 
was  in  a  better  position  than  they  to  know  what 
was  edifying  in  public  worship,  and  for  the  fu- 
ture he  could  only  promise  to  act  in  accordance 
with  his  best  knowledge  and  convictions  as  a 
Christian  and  a  minister.  By  this  answer  Alten- 
stein  was  roused  to  the  necessity  of  "making  the 
malignant  divines  harmless."  "The  evangelical 
church,"  he  says,22  "is  more  in  need  than  ever  of 
strong  supervision.  There  is  a  little  pope  in  most 
of  the  divines  and  it  is  very  hard  for  them  to  sub- 
mit to  anything  different  and  better."  In  this 
instance,  however,  Schleiermacher  found  an  able 
and  influential  defender  in  President-General 
Motz  who  argued  determinedly  and  effectually 

22  Foerster,  ii,  175. 


190        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

against  any  persecution,  not  because  it  would  be 
useless  but  because  the  position  taken  by  Schleier- 
macher  and  his  companions  was  essentially  right. 
Altenstein  yielded  very  unwillingly,  and  so,  to 
quote  the  historian  of  this  period,23  "the  govern- 
ment of  Frederick  William  was  preserved  from 
the  blemish  of  having  hunted  the  greatest  theo- 
logian of  the  Evangelical  Church  from  his  office 
and  pulpit  as  a  'malignant  divine'."  To  which 
it  need  only  be  added,  to  set  the  incident  in  its 
proper  light,  that  the  spirit  of  Frederick  William 
and  his  advisers  in  endeavoring  to  force  the  twelve 
into  submission  differed  not  at  all  from  that  of 
the  Roman  church  toward  Martin  Luther  more 
than  three  centuries  before.  Shortly  afterward, 
the  promised  appendix  having  been  published,  the 
revised  liturgy  was  approved  by  the  ministers  of 
Berlin,  and  with  the  consent  of  the  congregations 
introduced  into  all  the  churches,  Schleiermacher 
also,  though  with  some  reservations,  consenting 
to  use  it. 

By  such  means  as  these  the  new  liturgy  was 
gradually  forced  upon  the  churches  in  every  part 
of  the  country.  The  Lutherans  were  the  more 
willing  to  accept  it,  the  Calvinists  the  more  reluct- 
ant, a  circumstance  that  did  not  escape  the  king's 
notice.  In  Pomerania,  which  was  strongly  Lu- 
theran and  chiefly  agricultural,  1136  ministers 
out  of  1311  had  adopted  it  two  years  after  its  pub- 

28  Foerster,  ii,  176. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        191 

lication.  The  king  was  so  delighted  with  this 
that  he  appointed  a  special  commission  to  force 
it  upon  the  other  175,  and  what  was  of  more  im- 
portance for  the  future,  conceded  the  optional 
use  of  old  customary  prayers,  formulas  and  cus- 
toms in  place  of  his  own.  This  was  so  successful 
in  removing  objections  that  similar  "appendices" 
were  prepared  for  every  province,  which  greatly 
facilitated  the  introduction  of  the  whole  liturgy. 

There  were  two  districts  in  particular  from 
which  opposition  was  expected,  and  where  the 
negotiations  led  to  important  results,  the  Rhine 
country  and  Silesia.  The  churches  in  the  Rhine 
country  were  for  the  most  part  Calvinistic  of  the 
Swiss  or  French  type,  rather  than  the  German. 
They  had  only  recently  come  under  the  Prussian 
crown  and  still  retained  the  independent  presby- 
terian  form  of  government  and  freedom  in  litur- 
gical matters  which  had  characterized  them  be- 
fore. In  1830,  eight  years  after  its  publication, 
out  of  769  ministers  638  still  refused  to  accept 
the  liturgy,  and  there  had  not  been  a  conversion 
for  four  years.  The  reason  for  this  wholesale 
refusal  was  two-fold.  The  ministers  insisted  that 
innovations  should  come  to  them  through  their 
own  courts  and  objected  to  the  form  and  content 
of  the  king's  liturgy.  Their  antagonism  was  also 
embittered  by  the  action  of  the  king  in  taking 
under  his  own  protection  and  preventing  suit 
against  two  preachers  accused  of  crime,  when 


192        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

they  declared  their  willingness  to  accept  his 
forms,  and  in  endeavoring  to  compel  submission 
where  the  preacher  was  willing  to  introduce  the 
liturgy  but  the  congregation  and  church  courts 
unwilling.  The  opposition  offered  was  so  gen- 
eral and  determined  and  so  unlike  the  plasticity 
of  the  eastern  provinces  that  the  king  and  his 
ministers  found  it  advisable  to  let  the  matter 
drop  for  a  time.  It  was  then  taken  up  through 
special  envoys  and  a  general  superintendent  who 
at  last  persuaded  the  king  and  his  advisers  that 
the  presbyterian  constitution  as  there  established 
was  historically  and  legally  justifiable,  and  that 
there  was  no  hope  of  introducing  the  liturgy  un- 
less this  was  formally  recognized.  This  the  king 
was  forced  to  do,  but,  true  as  far  as  possible  to 
his  principles,  he  insisted  also  that  the  state 
should  have  more  authority  than  the  merely 
nominal  oversight  of  previous  times.  The  result 
was  a  constitution  in  which  the  presbyterian  and 
consistorial  elements  were  combined.  Organized 
congregations,  presbyteries  and  synods  remained 
as  before,  but  a  general  superintendent  and  con- 
sistory appointed  by  the  king  exercised  super- 
vision over  every  province  (1835).  This  being 
introduced  and  an  "appendix"  prepared  and  ap- 
proved, the  liturgy  was  adopted  without  much 
more  trouble. 

This  new  constitution  was  destined  to  play  a 
larger  part  in  the  history  of  the  church  than  was 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        193 

at  first  intended.  It  was  obviously  a  compromise 
between  the  unyielding  independence  of  the  pres- 
byterian  churches  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  abso- 
lutistic  claims  of  the  king  on  the  other,  and  satis- 
factory to  neither.  But  after  some  time  it  came 
to  be  regarded  as  a  proper  realization  of  Luther's 
ideals  for  a  church  in  which  the  laity,  the  clergy 
and  the  state  should  all  share  in  the  government24 
and  served  as  a  model  for  the  constitution 
granted  to  the  evangelical  church  of  Prussia  in 
1873,  and  in  force  today. 

The  opposition  in  Silesia,  although  similar  to 
that  elsewhere  at  the  outset,  ended  in  bringing 
into  sharpest  focus  the  whole  question  of  the 
episcopal  rights  of  the  prince.  The  churches 
there,  like  those  in  the  Rhine  country,  had  only 
recently  come  under  the  Prussian  crown,  and 
still  retained  the  freedom  of  their  former  condi- 
tion and  some  of  the  strength  developed  in  main- 
taining themselves  in  an  antagonistic  Roman 
Catholic  environment.  When  the  matter  of 
union  was  broached  in  the  early  '20s  the  Luther- 
ans and  Calvinists  gathered  in  synod  in  Breslau 
and  thoroughly  sifted  the  whole  matter.  They 
began  with  doctrine,  separated  those  points  to 
which  both  churches  consented  or  could  consent, 
and  agreed  to  make  these  the  basis  of  the  new 
united  evangelical  church.  They  also  touched  on 
liturgical  matters,  declaring  it  to  be  their  opinion 

2*  Rieker,  367  ff. 


194        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

that  uniformity  was  not  necessary.  Then,  well 
pleased  with  themselves,  they  announced  the  ac- 
complished fact  to  the  king.  But  in  both  points 
they  had  run  directly  contrary  to  the  royal  wishes. 
For  the  king  was  persuaded  that  as  little  as  possi- 
ble should  be  made  of  dogma,  and  that  a  uniform 
liturgy  was  absolutely  necessary.  The  report  of 
the  clergy  was  therefore  laid  aside,  and  the  new 
liturgy  pushed  in  the  usual  way  by  pressure 
from  above. 

The  leader  of  the  opposition  was  Scheibel, 
pastor  of  the  chief  Lutheran  church  of  Breslau 
and  professor  of  theology  in  the  university  there. 
Defending  supernatural  Christianity  against  the 
prevailing  rationalism  of  the  earlier  decades  of 
the  century,  and  orthodox  Lutheranism  against 
both  Calvinism  and  indifferentism,  he  had  grad- 
ually gathered  a  considerable  following  among 
all  classes  of  the  people  and  the  clergy.  He  had 
been  one  of  the  very  few  to  vote  against  the 
union  in  1822  and  foreseeing  trouble  had  set  him- 
self to  study  the  whole  subject  of  the  origin  and 
history  of  the  constitution  of  the  church.  "He 
found  in  the  pastoral  epistles  the  elements  of  a 
divinely  revealed  constitution  of  the  church,  ac- 
cording to  which  the  congregation,  led  by  clerical 
and  lay  elders,  by  a  free  exercise  of  love  should 
maintain  its  pastor,  care  for  doctrines  and  exer- 
cise church  discipline  over  all  the  members."26 

25  RE,  xvii,  549. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        195 

This  constitution  had  been  generally  neglected, 
but  appears  sporadically  in  the  earlier  centuries 
among  heretical  sects,  and  later  in  Luther's 
writings  and  among  the  Bohemian  Brethren. 
The  consistory  of  the  church  in  Breslau,  com- 
posed of  ministers  and  laymen,  he  thinks  in  es- 
sential agreement  with  it,  and  as  long  as  the 
authorities  did  not  meddle  he  had  no  complaint 
to  make  on  this  score.  His  fundamental  objec- 
tion was  to  union  with  the  Calvinists  whom  he 
considered  in  the  old  orthodox  fashion  to  be 
heathen  and  anti-Christians.  It  was  only  when 
he  perceived  that  union  was  to  be  thrust  upon 
the  church  that  he  went  to  the  extreme  of  en- 
tirely denying  the  rights  of  the  king  in  church 
affairs  and  comparing  Frederick  William  III 
to  Balak  king  of  Moab  and  Antiochus  Epipha- 
nes.  That  he  was  not  the  "sly  self  seeking  fa- 
natic" that  the  king's  bishop  Eylert  represented 
him  to  be  is  sufficiently  proved  by  the  honor  in 
which  he  was  held  wherever  he  came  while  being 
hunted  from  place  to  place  by  the  Prussian 
authorities,  and  by  the  fact  that  after  the  king's 
death  he  was  named  honorary  member  of  the 
superior  church  council  and  called  to  the  chief 
pastorate  in  Breslau.26 

26  Foerster,  ii,  202  ff.,  endeavors  to  show  that  he  derived 
his  peculiar  views  from  Pietism  and  not  from  Lutheranism, 
but  can  do  so  only  at  the  cost  of  denying  to  the  latter  a 
part  in  the  religious  movement  which  expressed  itself  in 
missionary  activity,  in  Bible  societies,  tract  societies  and 


196        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Scheibel's  suspension  in  1830  for  refusing  to 
use  the  liturgy,  instead  of  silencing  him  and  cow- 
ing his  followers,  caused  him  to  protest  even 
more  strenuously  than  before,  and  his  congrega- 
tion to  petition  for  permission  to  withdraw  from 
the  church  and  form  a  separate  communion. 
They  numbered  about  1000  at  first,  but  the  ad- 
vertisement of  their  aims  and  their  persecution 
led  others,  both  clergy  and  laity,  to  sympathize 
and  join  hands  with  them.  They  wished  merely 
to  remain  as  they  had  been — orthodox  Lutherans 
true  to  the  faith  of  their  ancestors,  with  the  right 
of  ordering  their  own  services  and  managing 
their  congregational  affairs. 

From  the  standpoint  of  the  government  this 
attitude  was  not  only  destructive  of  ecclesiastical 
uniformity,  but  even  threatened  the  political 
unity  of  the  kingdom.  Religious  conventicles  in 
other  parts  of  the  country  had  been  discovered 
with  alarm,  and  the  king  had  been  advised  by  his 
bishops  that  the  spirit  engendered  thereby  was 
one  of  pride,  the  members  regarding  themselves 
as  peculiarly  the  children  of  God,  refusing  to  rec- 
ognize or  to  communicate  with  any  other  Chris- 
tians, and  distorting  in  an  improper  way  the 

prayer  meetings.  Such  things  are  not  contrary  to  the  spirit 
of  Lutheranism.  They  have  merely  been  absent  from  it 
throughout  the  greater  part  of  its  history,  mainly  because 
they  fell  under  suspicion  and  were  not  allowed  to  develop 
normally.  They  have  been  more  or  less  present  in  it  ever 
since  the  days  of  Spener. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        197 

precept  that  man  must  obey  God  rather  than 
man.  And  Altenstein  a  little  later  advised  that 
there  was  danger  of  the  religious  movement  be- 
coming political.27  The  petitioners  therefore  were 
denied  their  request  (December,  1830)  and  in- 
formed that  their  "separatistic  spirit  which  un- 
ambiguously displays  a  bold  rebellion  against 
what  pertains  to  the  general  peace,  and  is  par- 
ticularly suspicious  at  the  present  time,  is  not 
looked  upon  with  favor." 28  When  Scheibel  went 
to  Berlin  in  order  to  protest  directly  to  the  king 
against  the  attempted  violation  of  his  conscience 
he  was  refused  an  audience  and  curtly  informed 
that  "it  was  not  a  question  of  conscience  at  all; 
it  was  his  duty  as  a  subject  to  obey  the  orders 
of  the  king."29  More  particularly  he  and  his 
friends  were  told  that  the  new  liturgy  and  church 
union  had  nothing  to  do  with  each  other.  There 
were  "united"  churches  within  the  new  evan- 
gelical church,  but  there  were  also  un-united 
churches,  that  is  to  say,  churches  which  still  re- 
tained their  denominational  Lutheran  or  Calvin- 
istic  confession  and  character,  and  there  was  no 
reason  why  Scheibel  and  his  friends  should  not 
also  remain  loyal  to  the  past  and  accept  the  new 
liturgy  as  well. 

27  Foerster,  ii,  261,  283. 

28  RE,  xii,  4.     The  reference  is  obviously  to  the  excite- 
ment of  the  liberal  press  of  Germany  by  the  July  Revolu- 
tion in  France. 

29  RE,  xii,  2. 


198        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

The  most  charitable  and  probably  the  correct 
explanation  of  the  king's  attitude  toward  doc- 
trine is  that  he  was  incapable  of  appreciating  it 
or  its  place  in  history.  In  1813  he  ordered  that 
ministers  and  teachers  should  not  be  bound  to 
any  creed;  the  Bible  alone  was  to  be  the  norm.30 
In  1822  he  ordered  that  they  should  swear  not 
only  to  the  three  oecumenical  creeds  but  also  to 
both  the  Lutheran  and  the  Calvinistic  symbols 
"as  they  are  harmoniously  received,"31  and  as 
this  was  ambiguous  to  say  the  least,  a  later  order, 
in  1823,  prescribed  the  Augsburg  Confession  and 
the  "creeds  of  the  united  Evangelical  Church  in 
so  far  as  they  are  in  agreement  with  one  an- 
other." What  he  wished,  of  course,  was  to  bind 
the  ministers  to  the  consensus  of  doctrine  in  the 
several  creeds,  but  of  any  attempt  to  determine 
what  this  was  or  to  reduce  it  to  form  he  would 
not  hear.  The  synod  of  Breslau  had  earned  his 
displeasure  by  doing  so,  and  indeed  any  such 
union  creed  would  only  have  added  one  more 
to  the  many  that  were  already  in  use  and  given 
one  more  occasion  for  dispute.  His  ancestors 
had  attempted  to  unite  the  churches  on  a  credal 
basis;  he  was  determined  to  unite  them  by  leav- 
ing the  question  of  creeds  strictly  alone,  or  at 
least  not  to  disturb  it  any  more  than  was  safe. 
On  the  occasion  of  the  anniversary  of  the  Augs- 

30Foerster,  i,  192. 
31  Foerster,  ii,  45. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        199 

burg  Confession  in  1830  he  stated  in  a  cabinet 
order,  that  was  supposed  to  be  normative  for  his 
ministers,  that  the  Augsburg  Confession  was 
the  one  chief  confession  of  all  the  Protestant 
churches ;  and  he  hoped  to  bring  about  a  common 
dead  level  of  doctrine  by  ordering  that  in  the 
appointment  of  pastors  to  congregations  no  con- 
sideration be  given  to  the  earlier  denominational 
training  and  affiliations  of  the  candidate,  and  by 
prohibiting  the  use  of  the  names  Lutheran  and 
Reformed  (Calvinistic)  in  reference  to  churches. 
It  is  not  hard  to  see  why  conscientious  Luth- 
erans such  as  Scheibel  and  his  associates  felt  that 
their  most  precious  possessions  were  endangered 
by  the  interference  of  a  prince  with  such  views 
and  methods  as  these,  especially  as  they  had  also 
to  regard  him,  hereditarily  at  least,  as  a  Calvin- 
ist.  They  therefore  gave  no  sign  of  submission 
but  continued  to  present  petition  after  petition, 
to  offer  passive  resistance  to  all  measures  taken 
against  them,  and  to  continue  their  religious 
services  in  their  own  way.  Scheibel  refused  to 
acknowledge-  his  suspension  and  was  forced  to 
flee  the  country.  Other  pastors  that  continued 
his  work  were  thrown  into  prison,  and  the  mili- 
tary were  called  out  to  take  possession  of  a 
church  about  which  the  faithful  men  and  women 
members  of  the  congregation  had  gathered  to 
protect  what  they  called  their  own.  The  last 
episode  of  the  sad  story  came  when  the  miserable 


200        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

congregations  asked  for  permission  to  emigrate, 
and  even  this  was  refused.  But  in  this  even 
Frederick  William  III  had  overshot  the  mark. 
The  sympathy  of  a  great  part  of  the  kingdom 
had  been  enlisted  for  the  sufferers.  The  crown 
prince  put  himself  at  the  head  of  a  movement 
directed  toward  a  more  equitable  settlement  and 
was  seconded  by  many  influential  members  of 
the  judiciary  and  other  officials.  The  emigrants 
were  finally  allowed  to  go  to  America  and  the 
leaders  who  had  remained  in  prison  without  trial 
for  months  and  years  were  released,  but  only  on 
the  demand  of  the  minister  of  justice  himself. 
But  the  right  of  separation  and  the  formation 
of  independent  churches  was  still  denied,  nor 
was  it  granted  until  after  Frederick  William 
Ill's  death. 

In  many  respects  the  ecclesiastical  policy  of 
Frederick  William  III  is  closely  analogous  to 
that  of  the  Stuarts  in  England  and  Scotland. 
In  regard  to  the  divine  right  of  kings,  the  com- 
patibility of  monarchy  and  episcopacy,  the  en- 
forcement of  uniformity  and  lack  of  apprecia- 
tion of  more  important  matters,  the  subordina- 
tion of  law  and  justice  to  the  king's  will,  the 
failure  to  call  together  the  diet,  the  personal 
interference  of  the  monarch,  the  determination 
to  compel  obedience  by  every  means,  and  the  end 
to  be  gained,  absolutism  in  state  and  church, 
both  stories  run  closely  parallel.  The  main 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

points  of  contrast  are  that  the  events  in  England 
and  Scotland  took  place  in  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, those  in  Prussia  in  the  nineteenth,  and  that 
whereas  the  Stuarts  were  opposed  by  a  body  of 
public  opinion  that  effectually  withstood  their 
pretensions,  the  Prussian  king  found  little  diffi- 
culty in  blocking  or  thwarting  the  sporadic  at- 
tempts to  obtain  or  retain  ecclesiastical  liberty. 

To  set  this  in  its  proper  perspective  it  is  only 
necessary  to  recall  that  at  the  same  time  and 
almost  in  the  same  year,  when  the  whole  Prussian 
church  passively  allowed  the  urgently  needed  re- 
forms of  the  constitution,  the  mitigation  of  pat- 
ronage, the  organization  of  congregations  and 
the  introduction  of  church  discipline  to  be  set 
aside  by  the  king,  and  accepted  his  dictation  in 
matters  pertaining  to  the  innermost  life  of  the 
congregations,  one  half  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land withdrew  from  the  mother  church,  willingly 
forfeiting  material  and  other  advantages,  be- 
cause of  the  encroachment  of  the  civil  power  on 
what  they  considered  the  liberties  of  the  church 
in  the  one  particular  of  patronage. 

The  attempt  has  been  made  to  show  that  Fred- 
erick William  Ill's  personal  intervention  in 
church  matters  was  something  new  and  unique 
in  Germany,32  but  such  is  not  the  case.  It  at- 
tracted more  attention  because  it  occurred  in  the 
open  light  of  the  nineteenth  century  when  liberal 

82  Foerster,  ii,  301  ff. 


202        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

ideas  had  begun  to  penetrate  even  the  Prussian 
darkness.  But  in  itself  it  is  merely  a  continua- 
tion of  the  church  policy  of  the  old  territorial 
system,  as  Treitschke  rightly  perceives.83  The 
authority  of  the  prince  has  remained  the  same 
throughout  the  centuries  since  the  time  of  the 
Reformation,  the  manner  in  which  it  has  been 
exercised  has  varied  according  to  the  convictions 
or  the  fancies  of  the  individual  rulers.  In  1827 
when  Frederick  William  III  at  last  determined 
to  introduce  his  liturgy  everywhere  he  justified 
himself  with  three  arguments,  first,  the  author- 
ity of  Luther,  second,  liturgies  had  been  intro- 
duced by  the  princes  in  the  earlier  centuries,  and 
third,  almost  all  the  clergy  had  expressed  their 
willingness  to  adopt  it.34  Of  these  the  first  and 
third  are  not  in  accordance  with  fact,  but  the 
third,  the  similar  interference  of  his  ancestors,  is 
beyond  all  cavil. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  Frederick  William 
III  on  his  deathbed  enjoined  his  son  and  all 
succeeding  kings  of  Prussia  energetically  to  pro- 
tect and  maintain  the  new  liturgy  in  the  interests 
of  uniformity  and  pure  revealed  Christianity,85 
a  more  liberal  policy  was  inaugurated  by  Fred- 
erick William  IV.  The  "Old  Lutherans"  were 
allowed  to  separate,  but  not  to  call  themselves 

83  Deutsche  Geschichte  im  neunzehnten  Jahrhundert,  iv, 
567. 

84Foerster,  ii,  161. 

85  The  Edict  is  printed  in  Foerster,  ii,  55  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        203 

a  church.  "And  so  the  church  which  was  older 
than  the  established  church  itself  received  at  last 
a  belated  and  conditional  recognition." 36  Greater 
liberty  was  permitted  in  the  use  of  the  liturgy 
and  all  the  questions  of  reform  and  reorganiza- 
tion which  had  been  suppressed  for  twenty  years 
were  again  brought  to  light.  The  king's  own 
wish  was  to  establish  the  episcopal  system  with 
many  small  dioceses,  organized  under  an  arch- 
bishop of  Magdeburg,  and  with  apostolic  suc- 
cession assured  by  the  cooperation  of  English  or 
Swedish  bishops.37  Into  the  hands  of  a  church 
organized  in  this  way  he  was  willing  to  commit 
its  own  government  but  not  into  the  hands  of 
the  representative  synods  which  the  clergy 
wished.  For  a  general  synod  in  1846  had  de- 
manded the  establishment  of  presbyteries  and 
synods  representative  of  the  church  to  cooperate 
with  the  officers  and  courts  nominated  by  the 
king,  and  had  at  the  same  time  prepared  a  new 
creed  for  the  united  Evangelical  Church,  in  both 
respects  running  counter  to  the  royal  will. 
Progress  along  this  line  was  interrupted,  how- 
ever, by  the  political  agitation  that  culminated 
in  the  uprisings  of  1848  and  the  constitution  of 
1851,  from  which  is  to  be  dated  the  beginning  of 
self-government  in  both  church  and  state  in 
Prussia. 

86  Von  Treitschke,  as  cited,  v,  350. 

87  Von  Treitschke,  v,  361. 


204        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

The  Parliament  of  Frankfort  planned  for 
complete  religious  and  ecclesiastical  liberty.  The 
individual  should  be  entirely  free  from  compul- 
sion in  respect  to  private  and  public  worship. 
His  rights  as  a  citizen  should  not  be  affected  by 
his  religious  beliefs  or  preferences.  Groups  of 
likeminded  believers  should  have  perfect  free- 
dom to  meet  together  for  worship  and  to  organ- 
ize congregations.  Patronage  should  be  entirely 
abolished,  and  although  it  was  not  definitely 
stated,  it  was  implied  that  the  state  should  leave 
the  churches  entirely  to  themselves,  that  is  to 
say,  that  there  should  be  a  complete  separation 
of  church  and  state  after  the  American  or  Bel- 
gian fashion. 

Within  church  circles  opinion  was  divided  in 
respect  to  the  new  proposals.  The  demand  for 
more  liberty  in  both  church  and  state  was  all  but 
universal,  and  most  writers  advocated  a  repre- 
sentative form  of  government  for  the  church 
similar  to  that  proposed  for  the  new  empire. 
Others  were  found  who  favored  episcopacy,  or 
the  continuance  of  the  territorial  system.  Some 
looked  forward  hopefully  and  confidently  to  a 
free  and  independent  evangelical  church  which 
should  embrace  the  churches  in  all  Germany,  and 
many  deprecated  any  change  that  would  free  the 
common  people  from  their  obligations  to  the 
church,  or  the  church  from  the  ties  that  bound 
it  to  the  state  and  the  people.  It  was  feared 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        205 

particularly  that  the  church,  having  no  organs 
of  self-expression  and  no  experience  in  self-gov- 
ernment, would  not  be  able  to  maintain  itself 
and  that  the  common  people,  freed  from  the  com- 
pulsory contributions  and  compulsory  attend- 
ance, would  cease  to  render  it  that  material  and 
moral  support  necessary  to  its  existence,  a  fear 
that  was  undoubtedly  well  grounded  if  Schleier- 
macher  was  correct  in  saying  that  the  people 
regarded  the  church  as  a  yoke  imposed  by  the 
military  monarchy.  It  was  characteristic  too  and 
ominous  for  the  future  that  those  preachers  that 
enjoyed  the  reputation  of  being  orthodox  sided 
as  a  rule  with  the  monarchy  in  its  struggle  with 
the  growing  democracy  and  thereby  earned  for 
the  church  the  reputation  of  being  both  the  ally 
and  the  servant  of  the  absolute  state.38 

The  political  agitation  of  1848  failed  of  its 
objects,  the  unification  of  Germany  and  the  es- 
tablishment of  representative  government,  but  it 
at  least  had  the  effect  of  introducing  representa- 
tive institutions  into  those  states  that  had  suc- 
cessfully resisted  them  before,  and  of  giving 
additional  impetus  for  a  time  to  liberal  ideas. 
In  the  sphere  of  church  government  the  effect 
was  somewhat  similar,  but  it  is  to  be  doubted  if 
the  church  as  much  as  the  people. 

In  the  midst  of  the  disturbances  (1848)  there 

88  Ernst  Schubert,  Die  evangelische  Predigt  im  Revolu- 
tions jahr,  1848. 


206        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

was  published  a  provisional  constitution  which 
ordered  for  the  future  that  "the  Evangelical  and 
Roman  Catholic  churches,  and  also  every  other 
religious  association,  regulate  and  administer 
their  own  affairs  independently  and  remain  in 
possession  and  enjoyment  of  their  institutions, 
foundations  and  funds  intended  for  the  promo- 
tion of  religion,  education  and  charity,''39  and 
an  explanatory  note  added  that  the  hitherto  pre- 
vailing government  by  the  prince  would  come 
to  an  end.  Measures  were  even  taken  to  facili- 
tate the  transference  of  the  church  business  from 
the  existing  governmental  bodies  to  the  churches. 
In  the  constitution  of  January  31,  1851,  the  same 
sentence  appears,  though  with  the  additional  re- 
quirement that  all  religious  associations  may  re- 
ceive corporate  recognition  only  by  special 
legislation.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  no 
change  was  made  in  the  legal  status  or  govern- 
ment of  the  Evangelical  Church  which  continued 
afterward  as  before  to  be  ruled  by  the  king. 

How  this  is  to  be  reconciled  with  the  statement 
of  the  constitution  it  is  perhaps  useless  to  inquire. 
When  the  first  alarm  was  over  and  the  govern- 
ment again  felt  itself  secure  the  political  consti- 
tution was  modified  in  favor  of  the  monarchy, 
and  probably  the  real  explanation  of  the  govern- 
ment's failure  to  fulfil  also  its  promise  in  regard 

89  Quoted  from  Rieker,  394. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        207 

to  the  churches  is  that  it  did  not  wish  to  and  was 
not  forced  to.  But  an  interesting  theory  has 
been  advanced  in  defence  of  the  king's  action, 
which  may  be  mentioned  here  as  it  may  play  a 
part  in  some  future  settlement  of  the  relation 
of  church  and  state.  It  reaches  back  to  the  time 
of  the  Reformation  and  turns  on  the  peculiarity, 
which  we  have  noted,  that  the  reformers  did  not 
call  upon  the  princes  as  princes,  but  as  distin- 
guished members  of  the  church  to  regulate 
church  affairs.  On  this  basis  it  is  maintained 
that  as  the  jus  episcopale  does  not  belong  to  the 
prince  in  his  capacity  as  head  of  the  state,  but 
as  a  member  of  the  church,  the  constitution  of 
1851  which  declared  the  church  free  from  the 
state  did  not  declare  it  free  from  the  prince,  who 
as  praecipuum  membrum  continues  to  exercise 
the  episcopal  jurisdiction.40  To  which  the  answer 
is  made  that  whatever  form  the  appeal  of  the 
reformers  took  the  fact  is  that  it  has  always 
been  the  prince  as  prince  that  has  exercised  the 
jurisdiction,  and  that  therefore  the  jus  episco- 
pale is  not  to  be  considered  as  annexed  to,  but 
as  immanent  in,  the  civil  government,  and  there- 
fore is  modified  and  conditioned  by  anything  that 
affects  the  position  of  the  prince  as  head  of  the 

40  Richter,  Lehrbuch  des  Kirchenrechts,  edited  by  Dove 
and  Kahl,  177;  Jacobson,  Preussisches  Kirchenrecht,  119; 
Sehling,  in  RE,  x,  472,  and  elsewhere;  Friedberg,  Lehrbuch 
des  Kirchenrechts,  206. 


208        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

state.41  According  to  the  former  of  these  the 
king  is  the  supreme  head  of  the  church,  irrespon- 
sible in  the  exercise  of  his  jurisdiction;  and  the 
church,  including  its  head,  is  separate  and  dis- 
tinct from  the  state,  each  having  its  own  objects, 
methods  and  administrative  machinery  culmi- 
nating in  the  person  of  the  king.  This  distinc- 
tion, while  sometimes  called  a  meaningless 
quibble,  is  not  without  significance  were  it  only 
because  of  its  increasing  popularity  with  German 
scholars,  in  which  is  probably  to  be  seen  not  so 
much  an  attempt  to  defend  the  king's  preroga- 
tive as  fear  of  the  church's  falling  into  the  hands 
of  a  diet  controlled  by  Roman  Catholic  and  other 
anti-evangelical  interests.  It  is  of  comparatively 
little  practical  importance  now,  but  it  would  be- 
come important  in  case  of  the  introduction  of 
responsible  government.  A  choice  of  one  of 
three  dispositions  of  the  church  would  then  have 
to  be  made,  either  the  complete  separation  of 
church  and  state  involving  the  independence  of 
the  church,  or  the  subordination  of  the  church 
to  a  responsible  ministry  and  so  to  the  diet  (as 
in  England),  or  the  retention  of  the  jus  episco- 
pale  by  the  sovereign  as  a  personal  prerogative. 
And  in  view  of  the  peculiar  historical  origin  and 
development  of  the  relations  between  the  king 
and  the  church  the  last  of  these,  although  open 

41  Mayer  in  RE,  xviii,  717;  and  also  the  article  Kirchen- 
recht  by  Mejer  in  the  second  edition  of  the  RE. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        209 

to  criticism  at  every  point,  would  probably  find 
advocates. 

Should  such  a  crisis  occur  the  church  would 
not  be  found  so  utterly  unprepared,  at  least  as 
far  as  the  machinery  of  government  is  concerned, 
to  assume  control  of  its  own  affairs,  as  it  was  in 
1848,  for  the  whole  tendency  since  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Frederick  William  IV  has  been 
to  create  synods  in  which  the  thought  of  the 
church  may  come  to  expression,  and  to  sever  the 
connection  between  the  governmental  office  for 
the  affairs  of  the  Evangelical  Church  and  the 
other  state  offices.  Even  before  the  new  political 
constitution  was  published  (June,  1850)  the  king 
created  a  special  council  ( "Evangelischer  Ober- 
kirchenrat")  for  handling  the  inner  affairs  of  the 
Evangelical  Church,  making  it  directly  respon- 
sible to  the  crown  as  the  church  courts  had  been 
in  earlier  times.  This  done,  the  long  deferred 
organization  of  the  congregations  and  creation 
of  representative  synods  was  taken  in  hand. 

A  plan  for  the  former  which  had  been  pre- 
pared by  the  outgoing  department  was  put  in 
the  hands  of  the  new  council  with  the  command 
to  introduce  it  into  all  the  congregations  in  the 
eastern  provinces.  This  was  attempted,  but 
many  difficulties  were  immediately  encountered. 
The  eastern  provinces  were  the  stronghold  of 
Lutheranism  and  on  account  of  their  geograph- 
ical position  had  come  least  of  all  in  contact  with 


210        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  presbyterian  and  Calvinistic  churches.  There 
was  no  appreciation  of  and  so  no  demand  for 
congregational  organization.  Objection  was 
taken  also  to  the  organization  being  forced  on 
the  churches  instead  of  being  left  to  their  own 
option;  it  was  said  to  threaten  the  freedom  of 
conscience  of  the  individual  denominational 
churches  by  drawing  them  more  firmly  within 
the  less  confessional  Evangelical  Church,  to  put 
power  in  the  hands  of  the  masses  and  therefore 
to  be  dangerous  politically;  and  the  patrons  saw 
their  legal  rights  endangered  by  the  transference 
of  so  many  matters  into  the  hands  of  the  congre- 
gation and  its  officers.  It  was  not  until  ten  years 
later  (1860)  following  a  cabinet  order  of  Will- 
iam I,  commanding  the  introduction  of  both 
presbyteries  and  synods,  that  energetic  steps 
were  taken  in  the  matter,  and  only  in  1869  was 
the  work  completed  by  the  calling  together  of 
provincial  synods.  In  1873  the  new  constitution 
was  definitely  determined  by  royal  edict  and  in 
1874  it  received  the  sanction  of  the  diet,  if  that 
had  been  necessary.  The  last  stone  was  added 
to  the  structure  in  1876  when  a  general  synod 
for  the  eight  older  provinces  was  called  into 
being. 

The  new  constitution,  as  has  been  indicated, 
though  approved  by  the  synods  did  not  give  lib- 
erty to  the  church.  It  was  issued  by  the  king  "in 
virtue  of  the  authority  vested  in  him  as  bearer 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

of  the  territorial  church  government"  ("des 
landesherrlichen  Kirchenregiments" ) ,  and  pre- 
sumably can  be  recalled  by  the  same  authority. 
Of  this,  however,  there  is  some  doubt.  The  fact 
that  the  constitution  was  laid  before  the  diet  and 
by  its  action  became  a  law  of  the  land  would 
indicate  that  the  representatives  of  the  people 
have  vindicated  their  right  to  share  in  the  exer- 
cise of  even  the  episcopal  jurisdiction  of  the 
crown.  In  either  case,  however,  whether  the 
source  of  authority  be  the  king  himself  or  the 
state  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  real  govern- 
ment and  control  of  the  church  are  still  in  the 
hands  of  the  civil  authorities.  Not  only  does  the 
new  constitution  expressly  state  that  it  has  no 
reference  to  union  and  doctrine,  which  therefore 
remain  as  before  in  the  hands  of  the  king,  but 
even  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  constitution 
and  management  of  congregations  and  synods 
alike  the  king  is  able  to  exercise  control.  Royal 
officials  have  supervisory  rights  and  special  privi- 
leges in  the  synods.  All  recommendations  must 
be  approved  by  the  state  ministry  as  containing 
nothing  contrary  to  any  law  of  the  state  or  detri- 
mental to  the  interests  of  the  state,  and  then  laid 
before  the  king  for  sanction,  promulgation  and 
execution.  The  attitude  of  the  edict  is  paternal 
throughout.  Exact  directions  are  given  concern- 
ing privacy  and  publicity,  the  qualifications  of 
congregational  voters,  elders  and  representa- 


i< 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tives,  the  disposition  of  funds,  the  manner  and 
management  of  elections,  etc.  The  regulations  are 
mandatory,  provision  being  made  both  for  their 
enforcement  and  for  the  punishment  of  neglect. 
In  short,  just  as  in  the  political  sphere,  repre- 
sentative institutions  have  been  created  but  little 
power  or  authority  conveyed  to  them. 

"The  limitation  of  the  exercise  of  supreme 
power  which  was  applied  in  the  political  sphere 
has  simply  been  transferred  to  the  church,  a 
constitutional  form  of  government  by  the  par- 
ticipation of  the  representatives  of  the  people  in 
the  most  important  acts  of  the  sovereign,  the 
erection  of  honorary  official  boards  which  is 
called,  but  improperly,  self-government,  the 
strengthening  of  the  real  self-government  of  the 
local  communities,  that  is  to  say,  in  the  case  of 
the  church,  of  the  congregation;  but  of  the  real 
issue,  which  was  that  the  church  itself,  the  church 
as  a  whole,  free  as  over  against  the  state,  should 
receive  self-government, — this  has  not  taken 
place.  The  church  government  now,  as  before, 
is  government  by  the  state  organized  in  parallel 
lines  with  the  political  government.  As  the  sov- 
ereign has  not  ceased  to  be  the  true  ruler  in 
political  affairs  in  spite  of  popular  representa- 
tion, honorary  offices  and  local  self-government, 
so  also  in  ecclesiastical  affairs.  The  present  legal 
position  of  the  Evangelical  Church  is  still  the 
old  territorial  system,  modified  somewhat  indeed, 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

but  still  unmistakably  and  genuinely  the  same."42 
At  the  same  time  it  is  important  to  note  that 
a  beginning  appears  really  to  have  been  made 
at  last  in  putting  the  church  on  its  own  feet. 
This  appears  both  in  the  restrictions  placed  by 
the  new  constitution  upon  the  prince  in  his  exer- 
cise of  episcopal  jurisdiction  and  the  correspond- 
ing right  of  approval  guaranteed  the  synods,  but 
more  particularly  in  the  much  greater  degree  of 
freedom  than  ever  before  accorded  to  the  congre- 
gation in  such  matters  as  the  election  of  elders 
and  managers,  the  choice  of  pastor,  the  exercise 
of  discipline  and  the  management  of  their  own 
affairs  generally.  As  the  king  truly  said  in  his 
preface  to  it,  the  new  constitution  gives  the 
powers  within  the  church  a  greater  opportunity 
to  take  part  independently  in  the  life  of  the 
church  than  ever  before.  It  is  true  that  they  are 
handicapped  by  the  privileges  of  the  patrons 
which  still  remain  in  a  mitigated  form,  by  the 
legal  restrictions  that  bind  them  on  every  side, 
and  most  of  all  by  a  lack  of  experience  and  train- 
ing in  responsibility  and  self-government,  but 
nevertheless  the  opportunity  and  machinery  for 
congregational  life  and  effort  are  now  present, 
and  it  remains  for  the  future  to  disclose  what 
the  result  will  be. 

If  congregational  duties  had  been  voluntarily 
assumed   by   men   who   were   earnest   in   their 

42  RE,  xviii,  717. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Christianity  as  Luther  wished,  there  would  have 
been  less  doubt  of  the  issue.  But  being  imposed 
from  above,  in  many  cases  against  the  wishes  of 
the  congregations,  and  defined  in  terms  of  the 
civil  law  rather  than  of  Christian  freedom,  it  is 
questionable  whether  the  new  constitution  can 
accommodate  itself  to  the  needs  of  those  that 
seek  liberty  to  do  good,  or  the  desire  of  those 
to  whom  responsibility  in  such  matters  is  irk- 
some. The  leaders  of  the  church  are  alive  to 
the  necessity  of  creating  congregational  interest 
in  the  problems  of  religion  and  the  church  and 
of  organizing  and  directing  the  forces  now  re- 
leased. It  is  realized  too  that  the  time  is  near 
at  hand  when  the  inevitable  separation  of  church 
and  state  will  be  accomplished,  and  the  church 
forced  to  care  for  itself.  The  new  century  has 
been  particularly  fruitful  of  literature,  plans  and 
conferences,  and  also  much  real  work  has  been 
done,  but  it  is  too  soon  to  say  whether  or  not  the 
salvation  of  the  church  will  come  in  this  way. 
At  all  events,  it  will  require  some  time  to  over- 
come the  passivity  in  which  the  congregations 
have  been  sunk  for  four  centuries. 

With  regard  to  the  larger  aspects  of  the  new 
constitution,  that  is  to  say,  the  union  of  the 
synodical  and  consistorial  elements  in  the  gov- 
ernment, theoretically  the  new  arrangement  may 
be  described  as  an  ideal  one  in  which  all  the 
forces  of  the  church  are  released,  the  laity,  clergy 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        215 

and  government  all  sharing  in  the  responsibility. 
But  in  practice  it  is  a  compromise,  an  attempt 
at  uniting  two  kinds  of  organization  that  have 
previously  been  found  irreconcilable,  monarchy 
and  democracy,  government  from  above  and  gov- 
ernment from  below.  The  same  thing  in  almost 
the  same  form  was  attempted  in  the  sixteenth 
century  in  Hesse  and  ended  in  a  victory  for  the 
monarchy,  but  it  is  unlikely  that  history  will  re- 
peat itself  in  the  German  states  of  the  twentieth 
century.  The  idea  dominant  in  the  sixteenth 
century  and  at  the  root  of  the  state  establishment 
everywhere,  namely,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
state  to  care  for  the  spiritual  and  eternal  welfare 
of  its  subjects,  is  now  all  but  dead;  the  parity 
of  all  religions  in  the  eyes  of  the  state  makes  it 
increasingly  difficult  to  continue  the  special  bond 
uniting  the  Evangelical  Church  and  the  state; 
and  the  outspoken  denunciation  of  the  favor 
shown  the  Evangelical  Church,  and  of  the  Evan- 
gelical Church  as  the  servant  and  tool  of  the 
government  by  a  large  and  constantly  increasing 
number  of  citizens — all  these  indications  point 
to  a  time  not  far  distant  when  the  state  will  throw 
off  all  responsibilities  in  respect  to  the  church  and 
the  church  will  be  required  to  assume  independ- 
ence. This  is  not  putting  it  too  strongly.  Many 
churchmen  of  Germany  look  forward  with  ap- 
prehension and  dread  to  the  time  when  the 
church  shall  no  longer  be  controlled,  restrained 


216        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

and  supported  by  the  state,  but  forced  against 
her  will  to  assume  responsibilities  which  it  should 
always  be  her  joy  to  exercise,  and  the  free  exer- 
cise of  which  it  has  always  been  her  duty  to 
vindicate  for  herself. 

And  if  the  church  is  unwilling  to  be  released 
the  state  is  equally  unwilling  to  let  her  go.  The 
theory  of  the  Social  Contract  as  understood  by 
the  eighteenth  century  has  passed  into  the  realm 
of  academic  history,  but  the  theory  of  the  state 
with  which  it  was  accompanied  in  Germany, 
namely  that  the  state  alone  possesses  the  wisdom 
and  the  power  of  the  nation  and  that  the  indi- 
vidual citizens  and  groups  of  citizens  must  sub- 
mit to  its  will,  is  still  dominant  there.  The  state 
still  keeps  close  guard,  as  close  as  it  may  in  the 
twentieth  century,  upon  the  lives,  actions  and 
thoughts  of  its  subjects,  and  needs  the  services 
of  the  church  to  maintain,  for  its  purposes,  "the 
fear  of  God,  obedience  to  the  law,  loyalty  to  the 
state  and  an  amicable  disposition  toward  one's 
fellow  citizens,"  to  oppose  the  advance  of  Roman 
Catholicism  which  with  its  demand  of  submission 
to  the  pope  would  again  subordinate  the  state 
to  itself,  and  of  Social  Democracy  which  with 
the  catch  word  "religion  is  a  private  matter" 
seeks  to  overthrow  the  established  church  as  well 
as  its  ally  the  state.  For  all  these  purposes  the 
state  needs  the  services  of  the  church,  which  is 
constantly  in  touch  with  the  farthest  individual 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

in  the  realm  and  ever  ready  to  preach  peace  and 
submission  to  the  state  as  indeed  she  is  required 
by  her  constitution  to  do.43 

43  RE,  xviii,  721. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE   EFFECTS   OF   THE   TERRITORIAL    SYSTEM 
UPON  THE  CHURCH 

From  the  time  of  the  Reformation  until  the 
present  there  have  not  been  lacking  in  Germany 
many  pastors  in  every  generation  that  have_s±Qod 
fearlessly  for  what  they  considered  pure  doctrine 
and  true  morality,  and  by  their  learning  and  life 
endeared  themselves  to  their  parishioners,  and 
put  the  Christian  world  in  their  debt.  From  the 
homes  of  Lutheran  ministers,  as  from  the  Scot- 
tish manses  and  our  own  ministers'  homes,  have 
gone  out  sons  and  daughters  whose  influence  has 
been  so  great  and  good  in  every  department  of 
social  life,  as  well  as  in  the  church,  that  no  one 
can  doubt  the  seriousness,  piety  and  sound  disci- 
pline that  surrounded  their  childhood.  More- 
over, owing  to  this  constancy  of  the  pastors, 
there  has  been  a  steady  though  not  uninterrupted 
advance  throughout  the  centuries,  so  that  it  may 
be  said  that  the  position  of  the  pastor  and  of  the 
church  as  a  whole  was  never  so  favorable  or  se- 
cure as  today.  But  the  struggle  upward  has 
been  long  and  arduous,  much  more  so  than  might 
have  been  the  case  had  it  not  been  for  the  op- 
sis 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        219 

pressive  hand  of  the  state  and  the  lack  of  inde- 
pendence in  the  church.  The  Protestant  church 
in  Germany,  by  being  deprived  of  the  form  of 
organization  and  the  self-government  compatible 
with  its  principles,  has  never  been  free  to  control 
its_jninisiers^  to  train  its  people  or  to  play  its 
proper  part  in  educating,  disciplining  and  direct- 
ing the  thought  of  the  nation.  The  evil  effects 
of  the  territorial  system  are  written  plainly  in 
every  page  of  its  history. 

The  German  Protestant  clergy  suffered  in 
comparison  with  their  brethren  of  the  Roman 
church  in  not  being  supported  and  sustained  by 
a  closely  articulated  institution  which  was  able 
to  command  the  respect  of  all  by  its  imposing 
dimensions  if  by  nothing  else,  and  in  comparison 
with  the  clergy  of  the  Calvinistic  churches  in  not 
being  supported  and  sustained  by  the  laity  in 
their  congregations  and  their  clerical  brethren  in 
synods.  In  Germany  the  church  was  monarch- 
ically  conceived  and  organized.  Beginning  with 
the  secular  prince  and  working  down,  each  mem- 
ber in  the  chain  of  government  was  subordinated 
to  those  above  him  and  ruled  over  those  below. 
Thus  the  pastor  was  no!  so  much  the  spiritual 
adviser  as  the  ruler  over  his  parish.  Nothing  is 
more  striking  or  of  greater  importance  in  the 
history  of  Protestantism  than  that  the  Calvin- 
istic churches  everywhere  created  congregations 
with  a  more  or  less  democratic  life,  and  a 


220        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

sonal  bond  between  pastor  and  people,  and  that 
the  Lutheran  churches,  except  in  rare  instances, 
as  in  Hesse,  or  where  they  came  into  contact 
with  and  imitated  their  Calvinistic  brethren  as 
in  the  Rhine  country,  had  no  such  congregational 
life  until  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

The  relation  of  pastor  and  people  was  compar- 
able to  that  of  monarch  and  subjects.  This  is  to 
be  attributed  to  the  unwillingness  of  the  authori- 
ties to  allow  the  people  any  share  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  church,  and  to  the  circumstance  that 
the  pastor  was,  not  only  in  appearance  but  also 
in  fact,  a  state  official  exercising  and  enforcing 
his  authority  in  the  name  of  and  with  the  means 
provided  by  the  state.  His  duties  were  to  preach, 
administer  the  sacraments,  hear  confession,  cate- 
chize the  youth,  exercise  discipline  and  oversee 
the  school  and  poor  relief,  in  all  of  which  he  was 
responsible  only  to  his  superintendent  and  pat- 
ron. Apart  from  visiting  the  sick,  which  was 
continued  from  Roman  Catholic  times,  there  was 
no  pastoral  visitation.  According  to  the  plans 
of  the  reformers  the  private  confession  was  to 
be  made  an  occasion  for  advising  individuals,  but 
even  though  time  had  permitted  such  personal 
attention  the  plan  was  made  nugatory  by  the 
debasement  of  confession  to  the  recitation  of  a 
prescribed  formula.  Pastoral  visits  and  gather- 
ings at  which  the  pastor  might  meet  with  the 
more  serious  minded  for  prayer  and  mutual  edi- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

fication,  as  Luther  had  recommended,  were  not 
only  unknown  but  in  some  places  actually  for- 
bidden. It  was  not  until  the  end  of  the  seven- 
teenth century  that  they  were  introduced  by 
Pietism  from  the  practice  of  the  Calvinistic 
churches,  and  even  then  they  were  not  received 
with  favor.1 

The  social  position  and  recognition  accorded 
the  pastor  varied,  being  determined  largely  by 
the  dignity  of  his  church  and  his  own  birth.  The 
theological  professors  in  the  universities  were 
held  from  the  beginning,  as  they  are  still,  in  the 
highest  esteem,  forming  in  many  respects  a  class 
by  themselves.  The  court  preachers  and  the 
ministers  in  the  cities  were  also  highly  respected 
and  given  prominence  both  in  official  functions 
and  in  the  councils.  But  the  country  pastor  or 
the  village  preacher,  as  he  was  called,  was  re- 
garded as  little  if  any  better  than  the  peasants 
whom  he  served.  The  ironbound  distinction  be- 
tween the  several  grades  of  the  nobility,  the  citi- 
zens, artisans  and  peasants  which  reached  its 
climax  with  the  era  of  absolutism  and  fell  only 
with  the  reforms  of  Stein  at  the  beginning  of 
the  nineteenth  century,  fixed  the  boundaries  be- 
yond which  no  one  might  hope  to  pass.  The 
first  Protestant  ministers  were  recruited  from 
the  priesthood  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church, 

1  Tholuck,  Das  Jcirchliche  Leben  des  17ten  Jahrhunderts, 
i,  101  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  trades  and  lower  offices  of  the  civil  service. 
Very  few  of  the  nobility  and  practically  no  peas- 
ants are  found  among  them.  There  was  great 
difficulty  in  finding  candidates,  and  many  of 
them  were  quite  unsuitable. 

After  the  Thirty  Years  War  the  number  of 
applicants  greatly  exceeded  the  demand.  "It 
fairly  swarms  with  candidates,"  says  Schupp ;  "it 
is  impossible  to  spit  for  fear  of  hitting  one  in  the 
face."s  But  the  quality  was  not  good.  One  ex- 
cellent source  of  supply,  ministers'  homes,  had  suf- 
fered very  greatly  during  the  war.  The  nobility, 
as  before,  would  not  lower  themselves  to  such  a 
level,  and  their  example  worked  upon  the  lower 
classes  of  freemen.  On  the  other  hand,  great 
numbers  of  peasants  presented  themselves.  Every 
peasant  apparently  wished  to  have  a  son  in  the 
ministry,  and  these,  insufficiently  trained,  with- 
out home  advantages  of  a  better  kind,  and  under 
the  social  stigma  of  their  birth  (it  is  to  be  re- 
membered the  peasants  were  serfs  until  the  nine- 
teenth century),  were  not  adapted  for  the  role 
of  leaders.  So  harmful  was  the  presence  of  peas- 
ants in  the  ministry  considered  that  when  Wiirt- 
temberg  took  the  reformation  of  the  clergy  in 
hand  in  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
all  peasants,  laborers,  minor  officials  and  those 
not  belonging  to  the  "more  honorable"  classes 


Page  222,  Footnote  2. — Tholuck,  i,  94.  Drews,  Der 
Evangelische  Geistliche  in  der  Deutschen  Vergangenheit, 
16. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

were  forbidden  to  allow  their  sons  to  study  the- 
ology however  well  endowed  by  nature  they 
might  be.3 

The  difference  between  the  country  and  city 
pastors  was  so  marked  that  a  lower  degree  of 
preparation  was  allowed  the  former,  two  years 
of  training  being  regarded  as  sufficient  and  even 
much  less  at  times  accepted  for  the  one,  whereas 
the  others  were  required  to  have  pursued  a  course 
of  five,  eight  or  ten  years.  In  passing  from  a 
country  charge  to  the  city  a  second  examination 
was  required.  Lack  of  education  is  a  constantly 
recurring  complaint,  and  although  theological 
study  was  required  by  law  and  supposed  to  be 
enforced  by  superintendents,  little  improvement 
was  noticeable.  Nor  was  this  criticism  unjusti- 
fied. Many  of  the  preachers  were  ignorant  of 
the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  points  of  doctrine  so  hotly  dis- 
puted in  the  universities.  It  is  illuminating  in 
this  respect  to  hear  that  as  late  as  1720  two  pas- 
tors were  found  in  East  Prussia  who  did  not 
possess  a  Bible  and  never  had  possessed  one.4 

The  salaries  of  ministers  were  very  inadequate 
for  their  position  and  often  not  enough  to  pro- 
vide the  necessaries  of  life.  The  secularization 
of  church  properties  in  the  time  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, in  Germany  as  elsewhere,  enriched  the  no- 

3  Drews,  140. 

4  Drews,  89. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

bility  at  the  expense  of  the  church.  Besides  this, 
the  changes  in  the  services  resulting  from  the 
new  doctrinal  conception  of  the  sacraments  was 
accompanied  by  a  decrease  in  the  number  of  in- 
cidental fees,  while  those  that  remained  were  ir- 
regularly and  uncertainly  paid.  The  town  pas- 
tors were  better  provided  for,  but  those  in  the 
country  had  to  eke  out  their  very  meagre  sal- 
aries with  the  income  from  their  own  and  their 
wives'  labor  in  other  employments.  Teaching  or 
tutoring  was  common  among  the  educated. 
Manual  labor  of  some  sort,  and  generally  farm- 
ing, was  resorted  to  by  the  others.  Frequent 
complaints  are  found  of  their  selling  beer,  the 
brewing  of  which  was  one  of  their  special  privi- 
leges, but  the  selling  of  which  was  practiced 
against  the  law.  Even  with  the  income  from 
these  secondary  employments,  which  of  course 
had  to  be  pursued  to  the  neglect  of  pastoral 
duties,  they  were  often  not  able  to  live  with  as 
much  comfort,  or  rather,  lack  of  distress,  as 
the  peasants.  Throughout  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  there  was  a  constant  demand 
for  the  betterment  of  these  conditions,  but  it  was 
not  until  the  nineteenth  century,  after  the  Na- 
poleonic wars  had  made  the  situation  even  worse, 
that  it  was  taken  in  hand.  Even  yet  there  is 
much  to  be  desired  in  this  respect. 

Another  evil  was  the  abuse  of  the  patronage. 
"In  this  we  touch  a  matter  which  has  affected 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  whole  ministry  until  well  into  the  nineteenth 
century,  like  a  cancer  (and  is  not  yet  eradicated) . 
The  practice  which  established  itself  actually  cor- 
rupted the  pastorate.  It  was  ominous  that  in 
Protestant  lands  there  was  no  superior  ecclesias- 
tical court  to  watch  over  the  placing  of  ministers. 
Formerly  this  had  lain  to  a  large  extent  in  the 
hands  of  the  bishops  who  examined,  approved 
and  ordained  the  ministers,  and  so  had  it  in  their 
power  to  reject  unsuitable  candidates  when  they 
were  presented  by  the  patron.  But  the  bishops 
did  not  come  into  the  Reformation,  and  as  the 
patronage  was  allowed  to  remain  and  no  one 
had  the  courage  to  entrust  the  choice  of  a  pastor 
to  the  individual  congregations,  the  patron  ob- 
tained an  altogether  extraordinary  influence  in 
the  appointment  of  pastors — with  evil  results  to 
the  ministry.  ...  It  is  the  complaint  of  this 
early  period,  as  of  all  following  periods,  that  the 
patrons,  who  were  for  the  most  part  uncultured 
and  self-seeking  nobles,  often  appointed  men 
that  were  personally  pleasing  to  them  for  some 
reason  or  other,  but  wholly  useless  as  ministers. 
It  happened  not  infrequently  that  a  pastor  was 
appointed  for  a  set  time,  'as  when  one  hires  a 
servant  or  maid,'  and  more  often  that  the  patron 
demanded  a  fee  or  made  some  other  improper 
condition.  The  position  occupied  by  the  patron 
in  the  country  and  the  mayor  in  the  towns  in 
relation  to  the  pastors  can  be  appreciated  only 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

when  it  is  remembered  that  they  were  the  local 
magistrates,  and  had  the  administration  and  ju- 
diciary in  their  hands,  that  is  to  say,  that  they 
were  little  princes  (Obrigkeit).  ...  As  every 
other  prince  they  too  ruled  in  the  church.  The 
pastors  were  their  officials,  whom  they  handled 
altogether  arbitrarily. ' ' 5 

According  to  the  symbols  of  the  Lutheran 
church  the  congregations  should  have  a  voice  in 
the  choice  of  their  pastor  but  except  in  rare  in- 
stances this  was  not  observed.  Speaking  gen- 
erally, the  law  existed  only  on  paper.  The  only 
limitation  to  the  patron's  power  of  choice  and 
appointment  was  the  licensing  examination,  and 
this  was  made  of  little  or  no  effect  by  its  being 
held  not  before  but  after  presentation,  and  by 
the  nature  of  the  examination  itself,  which,  espe- 
cially for  village  pastors,  was  very  perfunctory. 
A  man  that  was  presented  by  the  patron  in  one 
way  or  another  was  sure  of  ordination  and  in- 
duction. It  was  only  at  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century  that  all  candidates  were  re- 
quired to  sustain  the  examination  before  pre- 
sentation. The  candidate,  after  finishing  his 
studies,  might  be  teacher  or  private  tutor  or  ser- 
vant or  groom,  or  do  anything  which  would  en- 
able him  to  ingratiate  himself  with  the  patron. 
"When  a  student,"  says  Schupp,  one  of  the  keen- 
est observers  and  critics  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 

5  Drews,  40  f. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tury,  "has  spent  all  his  patrimony  at  the  univer- 
sities and  finally  seeks  a  position  and  is  unable 
to  gild  the  palms  of  the  patrons,  he  must  make 
obeisance  and  doff  his  hat  to  some  ink  boiler, 
secretary  or  bootblack  with  the  request  that  he 
announce  him  to  his  master — and  then  it  runs 
'Yes,  domine  Johannes,  you  shall  have  a  place 
but  you  must  marry  Margaret  my  wife's  maid!' ' 
Schupp's  words  do  not  exaggerate.  To  the  lesser 
nobility  the  country  pastor  was  only  a  "Latinized 
peasant."  A  condition  sometimes  imposed  was 
that  the  candidate  marry  the  patron's  mistress, 
and  it  was  a  recognized  custom,  approved  by  the 
church  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  cen- 
turies, that  he  be  required  to  marry  the  widow 
of  his  predecessor.6 

Sometimes  the  patron  demanded  a  promise  of 
obedience  in  all  things,  more  generally  of  obedi- 
ence in  all  secular  matters.  To  what  degree  this 
was  put  to  the  test  depended  upon  the  respective 
qualities  of  the  patron  and  the  pastor.  Espe- 
cially in  the  period  after  the  Thirty  Years  War, 
when  the  caste  system  became  intensified  as  a 
sort  of  reflection  in  all  the  social  strata  of  the 
absolutism  of  the  monarch,  instances  are  not 
lacking  of  the  patron's  ordering  the  time  of  the 
service  to  suit  his  drunken  revels  or  requiring 
the  pastor  to  excommunicate  individuals  that  had 
fallen  under  his  displeasure.  If  the  pastor  dis- 

6  Tholuck,  90,  94  f ;  Drews,  68,  122. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

pleased  in  any  way  the  patron  simply  locked  the 
door  of  the  church,  or  hunted  him  out  of  the 
parish.  There  were  hundreds  of  such  unfortun- 
ates wandering  about  the  country.  In  behaving 
in  such  despotic  fashion  the  squire  was  simply 
following  the  example  of  his  lord.  Sarcerius 
(+  1559)  was  deprived  of  half  of  the  churches 
under  his  supervision  because  he  defended  a 
pastor  who  had  been  dismissed  by  the  prince 
and  of  the  other  half  because  he  reproved  a 
favorite  court  preacher  for  his  evil  life.7  And 
the  court  preachers  of  Brunswick,  at  the  dawn  of 
the  Enlightenment,  were  adjudged  worthy  of 
long  imprisonment  and  exile  because  they  ob- 
jected to  the  conversion  of  a  princess  to  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  faith  on  the  occasion  of  her  be- 
trothal to  an  Austrian  prince.  At  the  same  time 
Thomasius  gave  it  as  his  official  opinion8  that  a 
court  preacher  who  exercised  church  discipline 
on  the  person  of  his  prince  or  even  threatened 
to  do  so  was  guilty  of  shameless  disobedience. 
He  was  a  subject  of  the  prince  in  spiritual  mat- 
ters as  in  all  else  and  dared  not  judge  him  even, 
in  the  grossest  sins. 

Such  being  the  general  conditions  under  which 
the  ministers  had  to  live  and  work  it  is  not  sur- 
prising that  a  great  number  of  them  were  wholly 
unfit  for  their  sacred  duties,  and  that  they  ac- 

7  RE,  xvii,  486. 

8  Tholuck,  ii,  96. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        229 

commodated  themselves  to  the  evils  of  the  sys- 
tem. From  the  time  of  the  Reformation  to  that 
of  Schleiermacher  the  evidence  of  drunkenness 
and  other  sins  of  the  flesh,  of  neglect  of  duty,  of 
highmindedness,  pride  and  dictatorial  speech 
and  manner  is  sufficiently  definite  and  detailed 
to  leave  no  doubt  of  the  widespread  corruption. 
Treated  as  peasants  by  their  superiors  they  in- 
sisted on  being  treated  as  lords  by  their  inferiors. 
Being  placed  in  authority  they  took  pride  in  their 
rank  as  "sixth  or  seventh  class  officials"9  and  be- 
haved as  other  officials  of  the  time. 

Moreover,  the  ecclesiastical  origin  of  their 
office  encouraged  them  in  self-esteem.  Luther 
had  regarded  the  pastor  as  merely  the  representa- 
tive of  the  congregation,  and  the  first  Lutheran 
pastors  were  actually  installed  without  ordina- 
tion or  any  other  churchly  ceremony.  As  doubts 
were  raised  thereby  in  the  minds  of  both  pastors 
and  people  of  the  validity  of  such  methods,  a 
formal  ordination  with  the  laying  on  of  hands 
was  used  as  early  as  1530.  This,  together  with 
the  administration  of  the  sacraments  and  the  ab- 
solution, which  were  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the 
pastors,  the  monarchical  government  of  the  con- 
gregation committed  to  them,  and  the  Lutheran 
doctrine  of  the  Word  brought  in  its  train  also 
the  belief  in  the  divine  right  of  the  ministry. 

9  Richter,   Geschichte   der  evangeliscnen  Kir chenverf as- 
sung,  246. 


230        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

"The  preaching  office  is  the  highest  office,  as 
much  better  than  the  civil  office  as  the  soul  is 
better  than  the  body."  "The  Holy  Spirit  works 
in  the  preaching  office.  Blasphemy  against  it 
is  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  an  un- 
pardonable sin."10  This  was  the  belief  of  the 
"orthodox"  period. 

Actuated  by  such  a  high  conception  of  their 
office  the  pastors  might  have  been  expected  to 
stand  firmly  for  what  they  considered  right,  and 
so  they  did  or  at  least  attempted  to.  One  of  the 
saddest  episodes  in  the  history  of  the  Lutheran 
church  is  the  struggle  between  the  pastors  en- 
deavoring to  enforce  discipline  and  the  patrons 
and  congregations  resisting.  The  greater  ex- 
communication was  taken  out  of  the  pastors' 
hands  at  an  early  date,  but  as  a  rule  they  were 
supposed  to  exercise  the  lesser  excommunication, 
that  is  to  say,  to  exclude  sinners  from  the  Lord's 
Supper  and  some  other  privileges.  The  inca- 
pacity of  many  of  the  pastors,  the  lack  of  any 
support  or  cooperation  on  the  part  of  the  con- 
gregation, the  method  of  scolding  and  denounc- 
ing by  name  from  the  pulpit,  the  interference  of 
the  patron  when  he  wished  or  of  the  superintend- 
ent, and  the  stolid  resistance  offered  by  the  con- 
gregations made  discipline  little  more  than  a 
scandal. 

For  the  first  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the 

10  Quoted  from  Drews,  51. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Reformation  the  position  of  the  Lutheran  pastor 
more  nearly  resembled  that  of  his  Roman  Cath- 
olic predecessor  than  that  of  a  Protestant  minis- 
ter as  described  by  Luther.  In  respect  to  sub- 
ordination to  authority,  authority  over  the  con- 
gregation, and  the  emphasis  laid  upon  the  office 
rather  than  upon  the  man,  there  is  little  to  dis- 
tinguish the  Lutheran  from  the  Roman  Catholic 
system. 

It  was  Eietism  that  first  offered  effective  criti- 
cism to  this  state  of  affairs  and  suggested  a  .pro- 
gram of  reform.  The  pastor  should  be  above 
all  things  a  winner  of  souls,  not  a  mere  official. 
The  means  to  be  used  by  him  were  not  discipline, 
coercion  and  the  formal  use  of  the  sacraments, 
but  the  example  of  a  pure  and  holy  life,  personal 
intercourse  with  parishioners,  pastoral  visits, 
Bible  classes,  prayer  meetings  and  other  things 
of  a  like  nature.  The  office  of  the  preacher 
should  yield  to  the  Christian,  and  the  outward 
forms  and  services  of  the  church  to  the  religion 
of  the  spirit.  These  ideas  have  been  growing 
ever  since  the  days  of  Spener>  and  have  been 
very  fruitful.  The  effect  was  felt  immediately 
in  some  places,  notably  in  Wiirttemberg  where 
the  clergy  organized  themselves  into  groups, 
after  the  Calvinistic  fashion,  for  the  purpose  of 
mutual  edification  and  support.  A  higher  stand- 
ard of  both  scholarship  and  godliness  than  before 
was  required  of  candidates  in  many  places  and 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

provision  made  for  their  better  training.     But 
the  influence  of  Pietism  was  very  restricted  at 
first  and  soon  had  to  yield  before  Rationalism^  f 
which  also  did  its  share  in  breaking  down  the  Te 
"orthodox"  theory  of  the  preaching  office.    The 
preacher  was  so  far  from  being  a  priest  that  he 
was  only  a  teacher  of  morality  and  of  religion, 
and  as  such  should  lay  claim  to  no  honors  or 
privileges  or  rights  which  did  not  come  to  him  as 
scholar  and  pedagogue. 

Pietism  and  Rationalism  together  did  much  to 
change  the  conception  of  the  minister's  office  and 
duties  and  to  create  a  demand  for  good,  well 
educated  men,  but  they  had  no  immediate  effect 
upon  the  evils  of  patronage  and  of  servility  toward 
the  state.  Indeed,  as  we  have  seen,  it  was  in  the 
eighteenth  century  that  the  church  became  most 
completely  incorporated  in  the  state  and  the  pas- 
tors less  independent,  if  possible,  than  before, 
while  the  story  of  the  introduction  of  the  liturgy 
by  Frederick  William  III  sufficiently  illustrates 
the  lack  of  independence  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. That  century  saw  many  improvements. 
The  pastors  were  better  provided  for,  in  the  first 
place.  Greater  care  was  taken  with  their  train- 
ing and  examinations.  The  choice  of  the  patrons 
was  limited  to  candidates  already  approved  by 
the  church  courts.  The  breaking  down  of  the 
caste  system  at  the  beginning  of  the  century 
prepared  the  way  for  their  taking  the  position 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        233 

in  society  to  which  they  were  entitled  by  educa- 
tion and  culture,  if  not  by  birth.  And  finally, 
and  most  important  for  the  future,  they  were 
organized  in  synods  where  they  could  meet  to- 
gether and  take  counsel  as  brethren  for  their  own 
good  and  the  good  of  the  church,  and  share  in 
its  government.  The  evils  of  the  patronage  still 
remain,  though  in  a  mitigated  form,  and  there 
are  indications  that  even  these  will  soon  be  en- 
tirely removed.  And  in  place  of  the  patron,  as 
pastors'  assistants  there  is  a  body  of  elders,  a 
presbytery,  chosen  indeed  under  restrictions  that 
savor  more  of  the  state  than  the  church,  but 
nevertheless  a  representative  body  of  laymen 
that  may  do  much  to  remove  the  ancient  deep 
seated  distrust  of  the  pastor  and  the  church  and 
to  initiate  such  a  congregational  life  as  Luther 
had  in  mind  in  his  "German  Mass." 

It  is  sad  to  think  that  the  German  pastor  has 
had  to  wait  until  today  for  this.  All  the  more 
so  because  the  remedy  lay  ready  to  hand.  For 
the  immorality  and  servility,  the  claims  of  divine 
right  and  power  over  parishioners,  the  gross  ig- 
norance, vulgarity,  ignobility  and  intolerance, 
and  the  contempt  in  which  they  were  held,  that 
characterized  such  a  large  proportion  of  the 
Lutheran  clergy  were  almost  entirely  lacking  in 
the  Calvinistic  churches  to  the  west  of  them.11 
This  was  due  in  large  measure  to  the  system  of 

11  Tholuck,  i,  268  ff. 


234        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

church  government  whereby  laity  and  clergy 
worked  together  as  brethren,  both  in  the  congre- 
gations and  the  higher  courts,  thus  assuring  a 
unity  of  will  and  action  as  well  as  controlling 
and  supporting  the  individual  by  the  strength 
of  many.  The  consistorial  courts  in  Germany 
were  devised  partly  in  order  to  protect  the 
individual  pastor  from  aggression,  but  they 
failed  to  do  so.  His  isolation  at  the  end  of 
the  eighteenth  century  was  as  complete  as  in  the 
sixteenth,  if  not  more  so.  In  like  manner  the 
many  laws  and  regulations  issued  from  above 
respecting  the  educational  qualifications  and 
purity  of  life  of  candidates  and  ministres  failed 
to  have  any  appreciable  effect.  Some  of  the  best 
German  pastors  knew  the  proper  solution  and 
advocated  it.  The  establishment  of  clerical  syn- 
ods for  purposes  of  edification  was  a  success 
wherever  tried,  as  in  Hesse,  and  later  in  Wiirttem- 
berg,  and  the  successful  independent  Lutheran 
churches  in  Silesia  and  the  Rhine  country  certain- 
ly showed  that  their  clergy  needed  no  state  super- 
vision or  control.  But  in  spite  of  all  these  testi- 
monies the  German  clergy  have  had  to  wait  for 
their  emancipation  until  the  present  day. 

The  evils  of  the  state  establishment  appear 
even  more  deleterious  when  regarded  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  people.  The  great  outstanding 
fact  in  this  respect  is  that  the  German  Protestant 
church  has  never  been  the  people's  church.  The 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        235 

very  thing  which  the  §jtate  control  was  designed 
to  bring  about,  namely,  the  Christianization  of 
the  people  in  the  Protestant  sense  of  the  word, 
remains  unaccomplished,  and  in  its  place  there  is 
and  always  has  been  a  feeling  of  enmity  among 
the  masses  toward  the  church  as  the  instrument  of 
the  state,  and  a  corresponding  feeling  among  the 
religiously  inclined  that  it  could  not  satisfy  their 
religious  needs. 

The  reasons  for  this  are  not  hard  to  find.  The 
first  and  foremost  was  Luther's  attitude  toward 
the  peasants  and  artisans  in  the  Peasants'  War. 
When  he  definitely  sided  with  the  princes,  bid- 
ding them  in  God's  name  to  "stab,  beat  and 
strangle,"  he  lost  the  lower  classes  for  the  Re- 
formation. The  peasants  and  laboring  classes, 
beaten  into  submission,  and  subjected  to  even 
greater  abuses  than  before,  had  nothing  but 
hatred  for  the  person  and  teaching  of  the  man 
whom  they  had  called  upon  to  champion  their 
cause  and  who,  though  acknowledging  the  right- 
fulness  of  their  claims,  nevertheless  sided  with 
their  oppressors.  Moreover,  when  the  new 
church  was  organized  the  people  found  them- 
selves with  no  more  religious  or  ecclesiastical 
liberty  than  before,  and  indeed,  except  for  a  few 
alterations  in  the  liturgy  and  the  condemnation 
of  the  pope  from  the  pulpit,  might  have  sup- 
posed that  no  change  had  taken  place.  In  the 
Saxon  visitation  of  1527  many  were  found  who 


236        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

thought  the  difference  between  Protestant  and 
Roman  consisted  solely  in  the  use  of  wine  in  the 
Lord's  Supper  by  the  former.  Attendance  at 
church  and  sacrament  and  payment  of  altar  fees 
and  church  dues  were  required  as  before,  under 
pain  of  fine  and  imprisonment.  Sins  were  con- 
fessed and  absolution  received  in  very  much  the 
same  way,  and,  after  a  little,  money  payment 
could  be  substituted  for  penance.  The  minister 
was  their  rector  or  governor,  as  the  Roman  priest 
had  been.  Failure  to  obey  him  might  bring  in 
its  train  serious  consequences.  The  superior 
courts,  the  consistories,  bore  strong  resemblance 
to  their  Roman  counterparts.  There  was  even 
the  same  confusion  of  jurisdiction  as  before,  but 
now  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical  courts  were  the 
instruments  of  one  and  the  same  supreme  author- 
ity. The  common  man  rightly  regarded  his 
pastor  as  an  officer  of  the  government  and  the 
representative  of  law.  More  particularly,  as  the 
personal  relations  between  them  were  predomi- 
nantly of  a  disciplinary  character,  he  regarded 
him  as  a  penal  officer,12  and  in  this  too  he  was 
right,  for  civil  and  ecclesiastical  disciplines  were 
not  kept  distinct  in  the  German  states. 

It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  to  learn  that 
there  was  _cpnstant  enmity  between  the  people 
and  their  pastors  during  the  "orthodox"  period, 
thougETtTie  length  to  which  the  peasants  some- 

"Richter,  200;  Drews,  71, 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        237 

times  went  in  expressing  their  feelings  is  as- 
tounding. Not  only  olid  they  interrupt  the 
church  services  by  whistling  or  shouting  in  the 
church  or  playing  noisily  in  the  adjacent  grave- 
yard, but  they  lay  in  wait  for  the  pastor  with 
axes,  pitchforks  and  loaded  guns,  or  threatened 
him  with  a  dagger  when  he  ventured  to  correct 
them.13  What  a  fearful  picture  of  the  pastoral 
relationship  is  contained  in  the  following  abstract 
from  a  church  record  (1644)  :14  "The  following 
persons  have  persecuted  me  in  my  office  and 
brought  me  near  to  destruction  'but  God  hath 
magnified  me  and  delivered  me  out  of  their 
hands.'  J.  Dirkson  hit  me  to  the  ground  with 
a  hay  fork.  I  was  carried  into  the  house  as  dead 
but  afterward  recovered.  Some  years  later  he 
was  stabbed  and  died  in  the  street.  J.  Volkwart- 
sen  tried  to  kill  me  with  my  own  spade.  He 
was  afterward  killed  by  his  own  brother  and 
buried  by  the  south  wall.  Whither  his  soul  is 
gone,  God  knows.  P.  Jensen  tried  to  stab  me 
in  the  sexton's  house  but  M.  Payens  saved  me. 
He  went  to  sea  and  during  a  storm  they  threw 
him  overboard.  He  tried  to  hold  on  with  his 
hands  but  they  cut  them  off.  A.  Frese,  who  com- 
mitted adultery  with  my  wife,  went  after  me 
with  a  loaded  gun.  He  was  drowned  in  the  sea. 
.  .  .  D.  Momsen  broke  two  of  my  ribs  on  the 

18  Drews,  63  f. 

"Quoted  by  Tholuck,  i,  117. 


238        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

right  side.  He  did  penance  for  it.  How  he  has 
prospered  since,  experience  teaches.  I  have  for- 
given him.  O  Jesus,  do  Thou  protect  me  and 
Thy  poor  church  that  it  may  praise  Thee  to 
eternity." 

It  might  have  been  expected  that  Pietism 
would  bring  about,  a  better  feeling  by~the~new 
and  more  spiritual  conception  of  pastoral  duties 
it  inculcated.  But  with  the  exception  of  Wiirt- 
temberg,  where  the  cordial  cooperation  of  theo- 
logical professors,  superintendents  and  clergy 
made  it  possible  to  reach  all  classes  of  society 
except  the  nobility,  this  was  not  the  case.  One 
reason  was  that  the  size  of  the  congregations 
often  did  not  permit  a  pastor  to  come  into  per- 
sonal relations  with  his  parishioners.  One  pastor 
in  Hamburg,  feeling  this  keenly,  applied  to  the 
University  of  Leipsig  for  an  opinion  as  to 
whether  he  was  the  true  and  legitimate  shepherd 
of  his  parish  containing  30,000  souls  when  he 
did  not  and  could  not  give  them  each  his  pastoral 
care.  The  answer  he  received  was  that  30,000 
was  certainly  a  great  number,  but  the  prophet 
Jonah  had  had  over  120,000  in  his  parish  in 
Nineveh  and  yet  had  given  individual  attention 
to  each.15  Another  reason  was  that  Pietism,  at 
least  in  north  Germany,  was  popular  with  the 
nobility  and  at  court,  and  therefore  proportion- 
ately unpopular  with  the  lower  classes.  Fred- 

15  Tholuck,  ii,  102. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        239 

erick  William  of  Prussia,  who  was  an  ardent 
Calvinist,  welcomed  it  and  called  Spener  to  Ber- 
lin because  he  saw  in  it  something  akin  to  his 
own  ideals,  by  which  he  might  eliminate  some 
more  of  the  remnants  of  popery  from  the  all  but 
universal  Lutheranism  of  his  territories,  and  in- 
duce the  Lutheran  clergy  to  adopt  a  more  tol- 
erant attitude  toward  Calvinism.  Under  such 
circumstances  neither  Lutheran  pasbors  nor  the 
mass  of  the  people  were  likely  to  accept  it,  nor 
were  they  affected  by  it  to  any  great  extent. 
And  in  the  third  place,  the  strength  of  Pietism 
lay  rather  in  the  edification  of  the  religiously  in- 
clined. Much  time  was  given  to  Bible  classes 
and  prayer  meetings  and  proportionately  little 
to  seeking  the  sinners  that  remained  aloof  from 
such  things.  Moreover,  ^v^nJ^commorL people 
were  affected  by  the  religious  principles  -of  Piet- 
ism they  showed  everywhere  an  almost  irresist- 
ible tendency  to  withdraw  from  the  church. 
Altogether  Pietism  cannot  be  said  to  have  recon- 
ciled the  masses  to  the  Establishment. 

The  period  of  Rationalism  also  brought  no 
change  in  this  respect,  but  rather  additional 
proof,  if  that  were  needed,  that  the  church  was 
the  servant  of  the  state.  More  freedom  of 
thought  and  liberty  of  action  were  allowed  in 
religious  and  ecclesiastical  matters.  Indeed,  no 
one  seemed  to  care  for  the  church's  welfare  in 
respect  to  these.  But  the  pastor  became  all  the 


240        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

more  the  representative  of  the  government  in 
promulgating  and  enforcing  laws  of  a  purely 
worldly  character.  It  is  therefore  not  surprising 
to  hear  Schleiermacher,  who  was  certainly  well 
acquainted  with  the  circumstances,  declare  in  the 
early  years  of  the  nineteenth  century  that  the 
common  people  did  not  feel  at  home  in  the 
church,  but  regarded  it  as  a  yoke  imposed  by  an 
absolute  military  monarchy. 

During  the  nineteenth  century  the  parties  were 
ranged  differently,  but  the  general  situation  re- 
mained unchanged.  The  abolition  of  serfdom 
and  the  removal  of  legal  obstacles  to  the  transi- 
tion from  one  social  class  to  another  took  away 
some  of  the  causes  of  dissatisfaction  among  the 
peasants.  The  clergy  too  were  no  longer  so  dic- 
tatorial or  objective  in  the  treatment  of  their 
parishioners.  There  was  a  better  class  of 
preachers  and,  particularly  toward  the  end  of 
the  century,  more  churches  were  erected,  urban 
parishes  were  subdivided,  pastoral  attention  was 
given  to  parishioners,  and  an  attempt  was  made 
to  win  the  people  rather  than  drive  them.  This 
attempt,  however,  has  not  as  yet  succeeded.  The 
concession  of  some  liberty  was  followed,  not  by 
expressions  of  satisfaction  and  content,  but  by 
a  more  clearly  expressed  demand  for  other  re- 
forms in  church,  state  and  society.  The  shifting 
of  the  population  from  the  country  to  the  city, 
from  the  farm  to  the  factory,  enabled  the  discon- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tented  to  exchange  views  and  organize  as  had 
never  been  possible  before.  And  when  the  erec- 
tion of  representative  assemblies  occasioned  the 
grouping  of  the  people  in  parties  it  became  evi- 
dent that  a  very  great  number  of  them  were 
opposed  both  to  the  church  as  the  servant  and 
tool  of  the  state,  and  also  to  Christianity  itself, 
which  they  had  learned  to  know  through  the 
church,  and  which  they  judged  by  the  church, 
as  the  French  had  done  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury. The  Social  Democratic  party  is  not  today 
officially  anti- Christian,  but  under  the  phrase 
"Religion  belongs  to  the  individual"  ("Religion 
ist  Privatsache" )  which  they  have  adopted  from 
Schleiermacher  and  interpreted  to  suit  them- 
selves, there  is  hidden  an  antagonism  to  the  union 
of  church  and  state,  to  the  church  itself  and  to 
any  other  religion  than  that  of  humanity.  If 
the  disestablishment  of  the  church  is  brought 
about  and  its  original  freedom  restored,  it  will 
in  all  likelihood  not  be  because  it  asserts  its  own 
independence  but  because  the  mass  of  the  people 
reject  it  today  as  they  always  have  rejected  it, 
and  will  no  longer  support  an  institution  which, 
while  claiming  to  proclaim  the  word  of  God,  re- 
ceives its  orders  from  the  state. 

Another  indication  of  the  unpopularity  of  the 
church,  which  illustrates  how  it  has  been  regarded 
as  a  religious  institution  rather  than  as  an  instru- 
ment of  the  state,  is  the  constantly  recurring 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tendency  toward  separation  from  it  in  times  of 
revival  of  religious  interest.  The  ruthless  perse- 
cution of  all  separatists  under  the  name  of  Ana- 
baptists after  the  Peasants'  War  was  effective 
in  driving  out  of  the  country  or  into  hiding  all 
attempts  at  the  formation  of  religious  com- 
munities or  churches  based  simply  upon  the  vol- 
untary agreement  of  their  members  and  the 
desire  for  kindred  fellowship.  Only  the  Men- 
nonites  and  Schwenckfeldians  and  a  few  others 
maintained  a  precarious  existence  and  served  as 
gathering  points  for  those  who  sought  something 
more  than  was  offered  by  the  state  church. 

But  when  Pietism  revived  the  interest  in  per- 
sonal religion  and  rediscovered  Luther's  doctrine 
of  the  spiritual  priesthood  of  all  believers,  separa- 
tion became  a  really  serious  problem.  In  Wiirt- 
temberg,  in  spite  of  the  friendlier  disposition  of 
the  court  and  the  clergy  toward  Pietism,  many 
of  the  new  converts  were  not  satisfied  that  their 
private  classes  be  allowed  within  the  limits  of 
the  church,  but  demanded  permission  to  with- 
draw entirely.  After  several  refusals  had  failed 
to  bring  submission  they  were  finally  allowed  to 
withdraw,  in  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century. 
In  other  states  where  the  same  demand  was 
made  the  opposition  was  so  strong  that  the  Piet- 
ists were  forced  to  emigrate  or  continue  their 
meetings  secretly.  The  movement  begun  in  this 
way  was  continued  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
and,  especially  after  the  right  of  such  gatherings 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        243 

was  legally  recognized,  grew  to  large  propor- 
tions, and  is  now  known  as  the  Community 
Movement. 

Negatively,  the  members  of  the  communities 
justify  their  separation  by  saying  that  the  re- 
ligious life  of  the  state  church  is  cold  and  formal, 
and  that  the  congregations  are  spiritually  dead. 
Those  that  have  experienced  the  rebirth  and  re- 
ceived the  Christians'  call  to  service  cannot  be 
content  to  sit  under  a  minister  who  shows  no 
sign  of  conversion,  to  be  associated  with  purely 
worldly  people  in  the  formal  worship  of  God,  or 
to  be  the  passive  objects  of  the  church's  activity. 
Positively  they  appeal  to  Luther's  statement  in 
the  "German  Mass"  that  those  that  are  serious 
in  their  profession  of  Christianity  must  volun- 
tarily come  together  for  prayer,  reading,  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments  and  the  per- 
formance of  other  Christian  works,  and  to  the 
inner  necessity  that  drives  a  Christian  to  seek 
fellowship  with  others  of  like  mind  and  to  carry 
his  Christianity  into  all  he  does.  "A  converted 
man  feels  the  irrepressible  necessity  of  com- 
munion with  similarly  minded  men,  that  is,  with 
people  which  have  come  through  or  do  come 
through  a  like  moral  and  religious  inward  ex- 
perience, a  communion  with  brethren  and  sisters 
who  sustain,  foster,  protect,  cherish,  encourage 
and  cheer  him."16 

18  Kuhn,  Das  christliche  Gemeinschaftswesen,  15,  quoted 
in  RE,  xxiii,  529. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

Within  the  communities  is  to  be  found  the 
excessive  emotionalism  with  which  we  are  ac- 
quainted in  Great  Britain  and  America.  Indeed 
there  has  not  been  a  "revival"  in  the  English 
speaking  world  during  the  last  century  which 
has  not  found  its  echo  there,  or  an  excess  which 
was  not  duplicated,  from  the  "gifts"  of  Irving 
to  the  "speaking  with  tongues"  which  originated 
in  Kansas  a  few  years  ago.  This,  however,  while 
denoting  a  peculiarity  of  the  communities,  by 
no  means  may  be  taken  as  descriptive  or  indica- 
tive of  their  whole  character.  They  resemble 
rather  the  associations  formed  within  our  own 
congregations  for  the  various  departments  of 
Christian  work,  which  indeed  is  only  natural  for 
the  incitement  has  come  largely  from  America. 
They  own  their  own  halls,  maintain  training 
houses  for  missionaries,  deaconesses,  etc.,  engage 
in  evangelistic  work,  distribute  Christian  litera- 
ture, publish  magazines,  plan  and  carry  out  cam- 
paigns against  particular  evils,  support  home 
and  foreign  missions,  conduct  Bible  classes  and 
prayer  meetings,  organize  special  societies  of 
Christian  bakers,  butchers,  hotel  keepers,  etc., 
and,  in  general,  endeavor  in  every  way  they  can 
to  deepen  the  Christian  consciousness  and  apply 
their  Christianity  to  the  world  about  them. 

Since  about  1890  the  attempt  had  been  made 
with  some  success  to  draw  the  many  com- 
munities into  closer  relationship  with  one  an- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        245 

other,  and  also  to  overcome  the  hostility  toward 
the  established  churches.  Conferences  are  held 
annually,  attended  by  both  lay  and  clerical  dele- 
gates from  all  parts  of  the  empire  and  Austria, 
and  although  many  of  the  older  communities 
still  hold  back,  the  way  is  thus  being  prepared 
for  a  German  national  free  church. 

It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  the  number  of 
individuals  interested  or  even  the  number  of  the 
communities.17  In  Wurttemberg  alone  where 
they  have  taken  deepest  root  there  are  about  a 
thousand  communities.  In  East  Prussia  a  union 
organized  in  1903  had  grown  in  ten  years  to  fifty 
communities,  owned  nine  halls  and  supported 
twelve  evangelists,  one  deaconess  and  two  foreign 
missionaries.  Something  similar  is  going  on  in 
every  state  in  Germany.  Altogether,  in  spite  of 
blemishes,  this  is  one  of  the  brightest  pages  in 
the  history  of  German  Protestantism,  and  makes 
one  regret  all  the  more  that  these  forces  now 
slowly  and  with  difficulty  coming  to  self-expres- 
sion could  not  have  been  released  long  ago  in 
such  fashion  that  piety  and  zeal  might  have  been 
joined  with  learning  and  wisdom,  and  the  church 
united  rather  than  divided  by  the  determination 
of  those  that  took  their  Christianity  seriously  to 
meet  together  for  prayer  and  reading  the  Scrip- 
tures and  performing  other  Christian  works. 

17  The  figures  are  from  RE,  xxiii,  542  ff. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

OTHER  EFFECTS  OF  THE  TERRITORIAL  SYSTEM 

Just  as  the  importance  of  the  congregational 
organization  and  discipline  in  the  Calvinistic 
churches  for  the  later  political  and  moral  devel- 
opment of  the  countries  where  they  were  estab- 
lished cannot  be  overestimated,  so  too  the  failure 
of  the  Lutheran  church  to  follow  the  suggestions 
of  its  founder  in  this  respect,  and  the  continua- 
tion of  the  monarchical  priestly  system  played 
a  large  part  in  determining  the  political  and 
moral  condition  of  Germany.  It  is  quite  usual 
for  German  scholars  even  today  to  criticise  the 
arrangements  in  Geneva  as  harsh,  cruel  and  al- 
most inhuman,  and  something  similar  may  be 
found  even  in  English  and  American  books. 

The  correct  explanation  of  the  German  at- 
titude is  doubtless  that  it  is  a  remnant  of  the 
traditional  "orthodox"  hatred  of  Calvinism  and 
everything  associated  with  the  name  of  Zwingli 
or  Calvin.  Certainly  it  cannot  be  truthfully  as- 
serted that  the  German  reformers  or  princes 
were  one  whit  behind  the  Swiss  in  their  desire 
to  enforce  disciplinary  measures,  or  in  their  con- 
ception of  the  extent  to  which  discipline  should 

246 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        247 

be  carried  into  the  private  affairs  and  lives  of  the 
citizens.  Luther's  "Address  to  the  German  No- 
bility" clearly  shows  his  position,  and  the  de- 
tailed regulations  of  the  church  Ordinances1  re- 
veal to  what  extent  the  authorities  were  willing 
to  interfere.  If  more  proof  were  needed  it  might 
be  found  in  the  lament  of  many  good  Lutheran 
ministers  that  church  discipline  in  Germany  fell 
short  of  that  in  France  and  Switzerland  and  in 
the  personal  supervision  exercised  by  the  Ger- 
man police  state.  The  outstanding  difference 
between  the  Calvinistic  system  and  the  Lutheran 
consists  simply  in  the  fact  that  the  former  was 
successful  and  the  latter  was  not. 

The  cause  of  this  success  was  that  the  Calvin- 
istic system  was  in  agreement  with  and  founded 
upon  the  Protestant  doctrine  of  the  priesthood  of 
all  believers  and  that  the  people  responded  to 
the  challenge  of  personal  direct  responsibility 
to  God.  For  the  Calvinistic  system  was  not, 
either  in  Geneva,  France  or  elsewhere,  a  tyranny 
as  it  is  so  often  misrepresented  to  have  been,  but 
directly  the  contrary.  It  was  government  by  a 
committee  of  the  best  and  most  highly  respected 
members  of  the  congregation  chosen  by  the  con- 
gregation, with  whom  was  associated  the  pastor 
who  was  also  chosen  by  the  congregation.  In 
this  way  every  member  of  the  church  was  allowed 
and  encouraged  to  participate  directly  and  in- 

1  Sehling,  Kirchenordnungen,  passim. 


248        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

directly  in  the  affairs  of  the  church,  and  no  dis- 
tinction of  birth,  position  or  spiritual  superiority 
was  recognized.  The  elders  were  brethren  rather 
than  judges  and  the  minister  was  pastor  rather 
than  rector.  There  was  nothing  sacerdotal  or 
savoring  of  sacerdotalism  in  the  treatment  of  sin 
and  forgiveness,  and  nothing  despotic  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  discipline.  The  regulations  governing 
the  life  of  the  members  had  the  approval  of  the 
congregation,  and  were  enforced  by  men  having 
its  confidence.  The  object  of  discipline  was  to 
arouse  and  maintain  a  sense  of  duty  and  respon- 
sibility before  God  in  every  individual,  to  ad- 
monish in  brotherly  manner  those  that  erred  and 
in  the  case  of  unrepentant  sinners  to  exclude  them 
from  the  sacraments  and  the  church.  The  con- 
fusion of  the  civil  and  spiritual  jurisdiction  in 
Geneva,  Scotland,  New  England  and  elsewhere, 
the  apparent  triviality  of  some  offences  and  the 
character  of  some  of  the  punishments  inflicted 
are  repulsive  to  the  mind  of  the  nineteenth  and 
twentieth  centuries ;  but  these  things  were  charac- 
teristic of  the  time  and  not  of  Calvinism. 

It  was  a  strenuous  and  exceptional  age  in 
which  right  and  wrong  were  grappling  with  pe- 
culiar ferocity  for  the  mastery  and  when  excep- 
tional measures  were  needed.  We  today,  who 
live  in  a  similarly  strenuous  time  when  extraor- 
dinary laws  and  measures  are  being  taken  in  the 
defence  of  high  ideals,  are  in  a  better  position  to 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        249 

view  sympathetically  the  struggle  of  four  cen- 
turies ago  than  were  our  fathers.  At  all  events, 
whatever  imperfection  there  may  have  been  in  it, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  the  Calvinistic  system  with 
its  emphasis  upon  the  direct  responsibility  of  the 
individual  to  God  and  government  by  a  commit- 
tee of  the  best  men,  without  regard  to  birth  or 
rank  or  any  other  earthly  qualification,  was  the 
best  that  had  ever  been  devised  and  the  most  pro- 
ductive of  good. 

The  Lutheran  system  cultivated  the  idea  that 
religion  and  morality  were  imposed  from  above, 
that  they  could  be  cared  for  like  sanitation  and 
education,  and  that  it  was  the  sole  duty  of  the 
layman  to  obey.  The  importance  of  this  in  the 
education  and  development  of  the  people  cannot 
be  exaggerated.  It  lay,  and  to  some  extent  still 
lies,  at  the  basis  of  German  thought  and  German 
institutions.  The  German  was  not  encouraged 
to  judge  of  doctrine  though  it  was  enjoined  by 
Luther  and  the  symbols,  nor  was  he  even  allowed 
to  do  so.  That  was  imposed  by  the  prince.  The 
custom  of  confession  and  absolution  and  the  be- 
lief that  the  Lord's  Supper  wrought  forgiveness 
of  sins  continued  the  Roman  Catholic  idea  of  a 
human  mediator  and  an  opus  operatum  sacra- 
ment. The  individual  was  not  brought  face  to 
face  with  God  but  with  a  pastor  for  whom  he 
often  had  no  respect.  He  did  not  think  of  sin 
as  a  condition  but  as  an  act.  The  original  Luth- 


250        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

eran  view  of  grace  was  modified  to  permit  the 
retention  of  the  idea  that  a  bad  deed  could  be 
balanced  by  a  good  one;  while  the  confusion  of 
civil  and  spiritual  faults,  the  payment  of  a  pen- 
ance fee,  the  permission  to  substitute  a  money 
payment  or  fine  for  penance  or  correction,2  and 
the  comparative  immunity  of  the  upper  classes 
from  discipline — all  these  things  permitted  and 
encouraged  a  purely  human  and  superficial  esti- 
mate of  sin  and  morality.  What  a  perversion 
is  to  be  seen  in  the  action  of  young  people  in 
throwing  down  their  penance  fee  and  demanding 
absolution  before  the  communion  service,  and 
what  a  sad  confession  in  the  wonder  expressed 
by  Spener's  brother-in-law  Stoll,3  that  the  Cal- 
vinists  exercised  discipline  without  respect  to 
persons.  The  introduction  of  the  naturalistic 
philosophy  was  followed  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury by  the  release  of  both  princes  and  state  offi- 
cials from  church  discipline,  and  what  are  we  to 
think  of  the  morality  of  an  opinion  written  by 
Faculty  of  Law  of  Halle  University  and  worded 
by  the  great  Thomasius  :4  "The  aversion  to  con- 
cubines of  great  princes  and  lords  must  cease. 
For  such  princes  and  lords  are  not  subject  to 
the  penal  laws  applicable  to  private  persons  but 
have  to  give  an  account  to  God  alone;  and  in 

2  Richter,  229;  Drews,  Der  evangelische  Geistliche,  112. 

3  Tholuck,  ii,  236. 

4  Tholuck,  ii,  195. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

addition  part  of  the  splendeur  of  her  lover  ap- 
pears to  be  transferred  to  the  concubine."  When 
gross  sin  in  high  places  could  be  trifled  with  in 
this  way  it  is  no  wonder  that  the  lower  classes 
allowed  themselves  license.  The  whole  system 
was  contrary  to  Luther's  conception  of  Christian 
freedom  and  allowed  no  opportunity  for  the  in- 
dividual to  rise  to  its  heights.  The  German  lay- 
man was  simply  the  object  of  the  church's  activ- 
ity. He  was  not  encouraged  to  cultivate  self- 
responsibility,  self-examination,  self-restraint, 
self-respect  and  independentmindedness.  The 
people  were  also  debarred  from  participation  in 
congregational  meetings  and  church  councils  and 
so  felt  no  responsibility  in  church  matters.  By 
this  they  were  not  only  deprived  of  their  rights 
as  Protestants  as  defined  by  Luther,  but  also 
lacked  the  training  which  comes  from  sitting  at 
the  council  board  sharing  responsibility  with 
others,  while  the  church  and  the  country  in  gen- 
eral did  not  know  that  all  pervasive  activity  and 
voluntary  cooperation  which  was  so  fruitful  in 
Calvinistic  churches  and  lands. 

The  extreme  intolerance  which  characterized 
the  Lutheran  church  is  doubtless  to  be  connected 
with  this.  For  while  the  Calvinistic  churches 
were  not  free  from  blame  in  this  respect,  they 
never  unchurched  the  other  great  branches  of 
Christendom,  nor  hid  behind  the  high  wall  of 
their  own  particularism  as  Lutheranism  did. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

The  efforts  of  the  Calvinists  to  effect  an  under- 
standing were  not  only  spurned  but  interpreted 
as  a  confession  of  weakness  and  heresy,  and  it 
will  always  be  remembered  as  peculiarly  charac- 
teristic of  Lutheranism  that  it  objected  to  the 
reception  of  Huguenot  fugitives  and  under  the 
leadership  of  Saxony  opposed  the  extension  of 
the  benefits  of  the  Treaty  of  Westphalia  to 
Calvinists. 

Everything  was  conceived  from  the  standpoint 
of  unity,  absolutism  and  perfection,  we  might 
almost  say  infallibility.  It  throws  a  remarkable 
light  on  the  condition  of  thought  to  learn  that 
one  objection  urged  against  the  Calvinistic  form 
of  church  government  was  that  it  required  ma- 
jority rule  and  majorities  are  likely  to  err.5  The 
Germans  had  no  experimental  knowledge  of  nor 
faith  in  that  method  of  reaching  decisions  and 
assuring  united  action.  They  had  not  the  train- 
ing at  the  council  board  which  teaches  the  indi- 
vidual the  necessity  of  listening  to  opinions  other 
than  his  own,  of  voluntarily  subordinating  his 
own  will  to  that  of  others,  of  throwing  his  own 
ideas  into  the  common  pot,  of  putting  himself 
in  the  position  of  others  and  seeing  things  from 
the  standpoint  of  others.  In  short,  they  did  not 
learn  toleration  either  in  religion  or  anything 
else.  They  did  not  have  any  opportunity  to 
learn  cooperation  or  to  feel  the  power  there  is 

5Richter,  189. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        253 

in  union,  or  the  strength  that  comes  from  sym- 
pathy. They  did  not  even  have  the  opportunity 
to  exchange  opinions,  so  closely  were  all  gather- 
ings, religious  or  otherwise,  supervised  by  the 
authorities.  Sane  public  opinion  can  come  only 
from  a  people  trained  in  self-criticism  and  self- 
restraint,  and  it  can  make  itself  felt  only  when 
the  people  are  conscious  of  their  agreement.  The 
conditions  for  the  formation  of  healthy  and  ef- 
fective public  opinion  have  been  absent  from 
Germany  largely  because  the  people  were  de- 
prived of  their  privileges  as  Protestants. 

This  lack  of  a  high  sense  of  individual  respon- 
sibility and  mutual  support  has  borne  its  evil 
fruits  all  through  the  centuries.  That  the  de- 
moralization incident  to  the  Thirty  Years  War 
would  have  been  mitigated  by  their  presence  and 
operation  is  evident  from  the  better  condition  in 
Hesse  where  the  church  was  organized  at  this 
time  on  a  synodical  basis,  and  from  the  experi- 
ence in  Calw  where  the  pastor  Andrea  gathered 
about  him  a  committee  of  laymen  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  discipline6  and  the  cultivation  of  true 
religion  in  imitation  of  what  he  had  observed  in 
Geneva.  When  the  principles  of  natural  law, 
the  rights  of  man  and  the  "Social  Contract"  were 
introduced  they  won  a  hearing  only  in  the  univer- 
sity circles,  where  they  were  developed  not  in  the 

6  Drews,  78  f .,  89 ;  Ritschl,  Geschichte  des  Pietismus, 
iii,  8  ff. 


254        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

interests  of  political  and  religious  freedom  but  in 
those  of  the  absolute  state.  The  demoralization 
which  followed  the  military  defeat  in  the  Napo- 
leonic war  showed  how  quickly  a  nation  could 
fall  to  pieces  that  had  been  organized  ever  so 
well  as  a  military  monarchy  with  its  wisdom  and 
will  centred  in  the  head.  The  reformer  Stein 
perceived  this  and  made  plans  for  the  freeing 
of  the  people  and  the  restoration  of  self-govern- 
ment to  the  churches  and  the  towns,  in  order  that 
the  interest  of  all  classes  should  be  enlisted  and 
their  powers  utilized  for  the  salvation  of  the 
fatherland.  But  when  the  immediate  danger  was 
past  the  reforms  came  to  an  end  and  things  re- 
verted to  their  old  course.  The  only  effectual 
expression  of  opinion  by  the  people  of  Germany 
in  political  matters  was  that  of  1848,  and  even 
this  failed  of  any  real  result.  There  has  been 
no  effectual  expression  of  opinion  in  the  church. 
This  is  a  condition  of  affairs  that  requires  the 
most  careful  consideration.  How  did  it  happen 
that  wherever  Calvinism  established  itself  abso- 
lute monarchy  had  to  yield  before  it  almost  im- 
mediately as  in  Scotland  and  England  or  fight 
it  to  the  death  as  in  France,  and  that  where  the 
sister  Protestant  church  of  Lutheranism  was  es- 
tablished, absolute  monarchy  was  introduced  and 
has  persisted  longer  than  anywhere  else  in  west- 
ern Christendom?  It  is  not  because  Calvinism 
had  everywhere  to  make  its  way  against  monarchs 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        255 

of  another  faith  while  the  German  princes  were 
members  of  the  Lutheran  church,  for  there  was 
no  more  discrepancy  between  the  religious  faith 
of  the  Stuarts  and  their  people  than  between  the 
German  princes,  who  could  be  Calvinists  or  ad- 
herents of  any  one  of  several  schools  of  Luther- 
anism,  and  their  subjects.  Nor  can  it  be 
attributed  to  a  lack  of  training  in  self-govern- 
ment. The  free  towns,  the  village  local  govern- 
ment and  the  organization  of  the  trades  had 
prepared  the  way.  For  it  is  to  be  remembered 
that  the  establishment  of  the  absolute  and  bu- 
reaucratic state  belongs  to  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries,  not  to  the  sixteenth.  The 
brutal  suppression  of  the  people  in  the  Peasants' 
War  and  the  fear  of  similar  punishment  doubt- 
less acted  as  a  restraining  influence  on  the  mind 
of  the  masses  at  first,  and  the  official  supervision 
of  all  public  and  private  assemblies  rendered  it 
both  difficult  and  dangerous  to  plan  anything 
or  even  to  exchange  opinions  at  a  later  date.  But 
even  these  would  not  have  been  sufficient  to  hold 
in  check  a  serious  minded  people  determined  to 
achieve  freedom.  The  answer  must  be  sought 
not  so  much  in  the  form  of  the  state  as  in  the 
minds  of  the  people,  and  must  account  not  only 
for  the  continuance  of  the  absolute  monarchy  but 
also  for  its  rise. 

One  powerful  influence  was  undoubtedly  the 
doctrine  of  the  divine  right  of  the  princes.    This 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

goes  back  to  Luther  and  has  always  had  the  sup* 
port  of  his  great  name.  In  his  first  appeal  to 
the  nobility,  in  1520,  the  intervention  of  the  secu- 
lar arm  in  matters  formerly  pertaining  to  the 
church  was  justified  mainly  by  the  doctrine  of 
the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  which 
placed  all  Christian  laymen  on  an  equality  with 
the  clergy,  and  distributed  the  powers  formerly 
properly  exercised  by  the  hierarchy  to  the  mem- 
bers of  the  church.  Two  years  later  he  developed 
in  sermons  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  appointment 
of  the  secular  rulers,  and  in  1523  reduced  it  to 
systematic  form  in  the  treatise  on  "The  Secular 
Authority,  to  What  Extent  Does  One  Owe  it 
Obedience/'  In  this  he  proves  from  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  that  princes  are  ordained  of 
God  and  have  power  under  God  over  the  bodies 
and  worldly  goods  of  their  subjects.  It  is  their 
duty  to  maintain  order  and  to  punish  evil.  In 
respect  to  all  matters  pertaining  to  these,  uncon- 
ditional obedience  to  them  is  enjoined  by  God. 
In  matters  pertaining  to  faith  and  salvation  they 
have  no  authority.  If  they  attempt  to  use  force 
their  subjects  should  refuse  obedience,  for  God 
is  to  be  obeyed  rather  than  men.  They  should 
not,  however,  resist  forcibly  but  rather  suffer  pa- 
tiently and  leave  the  punishment  of  the  tyrants 
to  God.  Three  years  later  Luther  looked  back 
upon  this  argument  with  satisfaction,  saying  that 
since  the  days  of  the  Apostles  no  one  had  written 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        257 

so  clearly  of  the  secular  sword  and  authority  or 
apprized  it  so  highly  as  he.7  But  when  the  im- 
perial Recess  of  Spires  in  1529  seemed  to  en- 
danger the  life  of  Protestantism  unless  armed 
resistance  were  opposed  to  the  emperor  the  ques- 
tion of  the  legality  of  such  resistance  was  forced 
upon  him  from  a  new  direction,  with  the  result 
that  he  declared8  it  to  be  right  to  withstand  the 
civil  ruler  if  he  overstepped  the  bounds  of  law. 
Whether  he  did  so  was  to  be  determined  by  law-> 
yers  and  not  by  theologians.  A  few  years  later, 
1539,  he  declared  that9  "as  the  Gospel  confirmed 
the  office  of  the  civil  ruler  so  also  it  confirmed 
natural  and  legal  rights,  and  it  is  beyond  doubt 
that  every  father  is  in  duty  bound  to  defend  wife 
and  child  against  open  murder  with  all  the  means 
at  his  disposal;  and  there  is  no  difference  between 
a  private  murderer  and  the  emperor,  if  he  goes 
beyond  the  limits  of  his  office  in  the  exercise  of 
power  unjustly,  and  especially  if  he  does  so 
openly  and  notoriously.  For  open  violence  abro- 
gates all  the  duties  binding  subjects  and  sover- 
eigns by  the  law  of  nature." 

But  while  such  occasional  utterances  as  these 
make  it  possible  to  claim  Luther  as  one  of  the 
exponents  of  the  right  of  resistance,  and  might 
have  been  appealed  to  by  a  suffering  and  rebel- 

7  In  1526.    WA,  xix,  625. 

8  DeWette,  Luthers  Brief e,  iv,  222.      . 
8DeWette,  v,  161;  vi,  223;  RE,  xi,  743. 


258        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

lious  people,  they  have  had  little  if  any  effect 
upon  German  thought  as  a  whole.  Luther's 
teaching  and  example  after  the  Peasants'  War 
were  predominatingly  in  favor  of  subjecting  not 
only  body  and  goods  but  also  the  church  to  the 
civil  power  ordained  of  God,  whose  duty  to  keep 
peace  and  prevent  disturbance  was  used  as  justi- 
fication for  interference  in  matters  which  accord- 
ing to  Luther's  earlier  views  lay  outside  his 
jurisdiction.  What  was  thus  begun  under  the 
Reformer  was  carried  to  rapid  conclusion  after 
his  death,  with  the  result  that  the  princes  ruled 
over  both  church  and  state  in  the  name  and  place 
of  God.  It  would  be  too  much  to  say  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  divine  right  of  kings  has  remained 
unchallenged  through  the  centuries.  The  philos- 
ophy of  the  Enlightenment  and  the  Social  Con- 
tract theory  know  nothing  of  divine  sanctions. 
But  it  has  always  been  impressed  upon  the  minds 
of  the  common  people,  and  found  champions  in 
learned  circles  in  the  nineteenth  century  as  in 
the  sixteenth.  It  has  always  been  and  remains 
even  to  this  day  one  of  the  strongest  weapons  of 
the  monarchy. 

The  reverse  of  the  doctrine  of  divine  right  of 
kings,  namely,  that  of  non-resistance,  has  been 
of  even  greater  importance  in  keeping  the  people 
submissive.  Luther's  words  were  normative  in 
regard  to  this  also.  Evil  and  injustice  in  the 
civil  authority  do  not  excuse  uproar  and  rebel- 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        259 

lion,10  "For  it  is  not  given  to  everyone  to  punish 
evil,  but  to  the  civil  authorities  which  wield  the 
sword.  As  St.  Paul,  Rom.  xiii,  and  St.  Peter, 
I  Pet.  iii,  say,  they  are  ordained  of  God  for  the 
punishment  of  evil  doers.  It  is  the  law  of  nature 
and  of  all  the  world  that  no  one  shall  or  may  be 
his  own  judge  or  avenge  himself."  Following 
this  it  has  been  consistently  inculcated  by  the 
German  pastors  that  any  rebellion  against  the 
state  is  sin  no  matter  how  tyrannous  or  unjust 
the  government  may  be ;  though  there  is  a  differ- 
ence of  opinion  among  theoreticians  as  to  whether 
rebellion  is  ever  justified,  some  holding  that  it  is 
under  no  circumstances  permissible,11  and  others 
that  it  is  justified  only  when  the  national  exist- 
ence is  at  stake,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Netherlands 
and  Spain.  In  any  case,  the  German  Christians 
have  been  taught  that  nothing  would  excuse  their 
rising  against  their  rulers  but  that  it  was  both  a 
Christian  duty  and  a  Christian  virtue  to  submit 
and  if  necessary  to  suffer  under  tyrannous  and 
oppressive  measures. 

But  although  the  doctrines  of  the  divine  right 
of  princes  and  of  non-resistance  may  account  for 
a  great  deal,  they  do  not  explain  why  Lutheran- 

10  In  1525.     WA,  xviii,  SOS. 

11  Even  Schleiermacher  says  in  his  Sittenlehre,  253,  "With 
the  greatest  inclusiveness  we  must  say  that  it  is  not  possi- 
ble to  think  of  a  case  in  which  a  Christian  may  oppose  or 
escape   punishment  even  if  ...  it  be  imposed   with  the 
greatest  injustice." 


260        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

ism  and  Calvinism  moved  in  diametrically  dif- 
ferent directions  in  regard  to  the  relation  of 
church  and  state,  for  the  teachings  of  Calvin  in 
regard  to  both  were  practically  identical  with 
those  of  Luther.  The  real  reason  must  be  sought 
somewhere  else.  The  chief  reason  is  that  when 
Luther  declared  the  people  unfit  as  yet  to  be 
trusted  with  the  regulation  and  management  of 
their  church,  Lutheranism  ceased  to  inculcate  the 
essentially  Protestant  ideas  of  direct  individual 
responsibility  to  God  and  the  personal  call  to 
duty,  and  substituted  for  it  in  practice  if  not  in 
theory  the  ideas  of  submission  on  the  one  hand 
and  of  authority  and  priestly  mediation  on  the 
other,  both  of  which  were  essentially  mediaeval 
and  Roman.  Upon  these  as  a  foundation  there 
grew  up  the  divinely  ordained  church-state,  or- 
ganized from  above  down,  and  exercising  su- 
preme authority  in  both  the  religious  and  the 
political  spheres,  a  condition  unparalleled  in 
western  Europe  either  before  or  after  the  Re- 
formation.12 "In  the  conflict  between  Rome  and 
the  Gospel  the  secular  ruler  won  immeasurably, 
not  only  in  property  but  in  privileges,  not  only 
in  independence  and  self-consciousness  but  in 
duties.  The  whole  complement  of  prerogatives 
and  privileges  with  which  the  church  had  pene- 
trated into  the  sphere  of  the  civil  authority,  and 

12  Droysen,  Geschichte  der  preuszischen  Politik,  2nd  edi- 
tion, ii,  260. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

which  it  had  organized  into  a  scheme,  was  ac- 
tually and  theoretically,  by  the  new  doctrine, 
taken  from  her  and  transferred  to  the  civil  ruler. 
It  fell  to  him  to  take  her  place  and  keep  it  in 
the  future." 

In  Roman  Catholic  countries  the  mutually 
antagonistic  claims  of  church  and  state  have  held 
both  in  check  and  prevented  the  centralization 
of  all  power  in  the  hands  of  either,  and  in  Cal- 
vinistic  countries  the  people  themselves  have 
seized  the  government  and  made  all  tyranny  im- 
possible, whether  ecclesiastical  or  political.  For 
John  Calvin,  although  teaching  the  divine  right 
of  kings  and  the  duty  of  non-resistance,  included 
and  retained  within  his  system  the  idea,  which, 
however  unconscious  he  may  have  been  of  the  fact, 
was  incompatible  with  submission  and  tyranny, 
namely  the  divine  duty  of  the  individual  Chris- 
tian to  exercise  his  religion  both  in  worship  and 
in  all  the  affairs  of  life,  and  his  immediate  re- 
sponsibility before  God  for  the  performance  of 
this  duty.  The  Calvinistic  system  as  it  devel- 
oped was  based  on  this.  Neither  in  government, 
in  sacraments  nor  in  morality  did  it  encourage  the 
idea  of  a  priestly  mediator  or  rector  of  souls.  It 
brought  every  man  face  to  face  with  God,  first 
as  a  sinner,  then  as  saved  by  the  grace  of  God 
in  Christ,  and  then  as  the  Christian  servant  of 
God  called  to  do  His  work.  Beside  the  divine 
right  of  kings  stood  the  divine  right  and  calling 


262        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

of  every  Christian,  and  between  the  two  there 
was  bound  to  come  a  trial  of  strength.  With  the 
head  of  the  man  Charles  Stuart  fell  the  doctrine 
of  divine  right  of  kings  in  Calvinistic  countries. 
This  was  the  spirit  which  animated  the  early  Cal- 
vinists  in  France,  Holland,  Great  Britain  and 
America;  and  this  was  the  real  driving  power 
behind  their  efforts  to  secure  liberty.  The  ap- 
peal to  natural  law  was  only  secondary  and  did 
not  come  until  after  the  Huguenot  wars  had 
already  begun.  Whether  it  was  occasioned  by 
the  desire  to  justify  themselves  in  seizing  arms13 
contrary  to  Calvin's  teaching,  or  was  an  attempt 
to  put  political  rebellion  upon  a  broader  basis 
than  that  of  religion  and  so  to  justify  it  for 
others  than  Christians,  is  immaterial.  We  feel 
all  through  the  struggle  that  it  is  not  the  human 
and  natural  motives  that  are  compelling  but  the 
religious  and  Christian.14 

It  was  only  when  the  ancient  philosophical 
doctrine  of  natural  rights  was  shot  through  with 
the  principles  of  Christianity  that  it  was  able  to 
leave  the  academic  halls  and  express  itself  in  the 

13  Cardauns,  Die  Lehre  vom  Wider  standsrecht  des  Folks 
gegen  die  rechtmdssige  Obrigkeit  im  Luthertum  und  im  Cal- 
vinismus  des  sechszehnten  J ahrhunderts ,     1903.       In    the 
Princeton  Theological  Review,  vii,  2   (April,  1909),  Pro- 
fessor A.  Lang  quite  properly  points  out  the  non-protestant 
character  of  the  revival  of  Natural  Law  in  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries. 

14  Gooch,  The  History  of  English  Democratic  Ideas  in 
the  Seventeenth  Century,  1898. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

life  of  the  Calvinistic  nations  in  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries.  Since  that  time,  more 
or  less  independently  of  its  great  ally  it  has  been 
successful  in  reforming  the  institutions  of  other 
peoples  also.  Curiously  enough  it  has  found  its 
way  into  Roman  Catholic  countries  where  it  had 
been  taught  by  the  church  in  order  to  discredit 
human  institutions  in  favor  of  the  divine  institu- 
tion of  the  papacy,  and  naturally  it  has  had  most 
difficulty  in  making  headway  in  Germany,  where 
the  prince  united  in  himself  the  whole  power  of 
church  and  state  and  fortified  his  position  by  an 
appeal  both  to  divine  law  and  to  the  law  of  na- 
ture. In  this  respect  England  exhibits  a  curi- 
ously striking  parallel  and  an  equally  striking 
contrast  to  Germany.  In  the  introduction  of 
Protestantism  by  the  princes,  the  control  of  the 
established  church  by  the  state,  the  subserviency 
of  the  clergy,  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  right  of 
kings  and  its  counterpart  non-resistance,  the  al- 
liance of  the  church  and  the  aristocracy,  the  evils 
of  patronage,  the  claim  to  divine  right  by  some 
of  the  clergy,  the  exclusion  of  the  lay  element 
from  church  councils,  the  insistence  on  uniform- 
ity in  matters  of  ritual,  the  comparative  disre- 
gard of  dogma  or  latitudinarianism,  the  devotion 
to  a  church  manual  rather  than  to  the  Bible,  the 
superciliousness  toward  other  Christian  sects,  and 
the  failure  to  reach  or  to  hold  the  common  peo- 
ple— in  all  these  matters  there  is  a  strong  simi- 


264        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

larity  between  the  established  churches  of  Eng- 
land and  Germany,  which  might  profitably  be 
more  thoroughly  investigated.  The  outstanding 
points  of  difference  are  that  in  England  the 
principles  of  the  Reformation  took  hold  upon  a 
considerable  portion  of  the  people  in  the  early 
seventeenth  century,  and  were  worked  at  that 
time  into  the  political  and  religious  life  of  the 
country,  where  they  have  continued  to  live  and 
thrive  although  sometimes  embarrassed  in  their 
struggle  for  existence.  A  large  proportion  of 
the  Church  of  England  has  always  been  Prot- 
estant, and  the  common  people  have  found  a  re- 
ligious home  in  the  non-conforming  churches, 
which,  although  denied  full  liberty  by  the  law 
and  condemned  socially,  have  enjoyed  the  right 
of  existence  since  the  seventeenth  century,  and 
have  played  an  ever  increasing  part  in  the  po- 
litical and  religious  life  of  the  kingdom,  and  may 
today  claim  to  be  more  representative  of  the 
English  people  and  more  influential  than  the 
established  church  itself.  Germany  on  the  con- 
trary has  no  "non-conforming  conscience"  to 
criticise  or  guide  her.  Her  non-conforming 
churches  are  of  very  recent  origin  and  count 
among  their  members  less  than  one  per  cent  of 
the  population. 

For  there  is  nothing  in  Germany  parallel  to 
the  struggles  for  freedom  in  the  sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries.  After  the  Peasants'  War 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        265 

for  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  the  people  were  an 
entirely  negligible  quantity  in  the  government 
of  church  and  state.  Instead  of  asserting  new 
rights  they  lost  what  they  had,  and  the  absolute 
state  emerged  victorious  and  unchallenged  after 
the  ravages  of  the  Thirty  Years  War. 


attemjpted  to  revive  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of 
the  priesthood  of  all  believers  and  call  them  to 
service,  but  found  itself  antagonized  by  the 
"orthodox"  church  and  forced  for  the  most  part 
into  the  narrow  and  devious  paths  of  emotional- 
ism. The  doctrine  of  the  rights  of  man  came 
to  "Germany  through  the  naturalism  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  and  the  French  Revolution.  It 
was  but  an  echo  of  a  great  idea,  a  subject  for 
the  lecture  hall  and  drawing  room.  Not  until  it 
had  swept  over  western  Europe  in  three  succes- 
sive waves  did  it  at  last  find  a  lodging  and  then 
only  temporarily  in  the  heart  of  Germany  — 
Prussia.  It  lacked  entirely  any  divine  element 
or  anything  that  appealed  to  the  nobler  instincts, 
and  allied  itself  with  the  existing  monarchy  which 
it  strengthened  in  its  control  of  both  church  and 
state,  and  transformed  to  a  purely  natural,  hu- 
man, self-centred  and  self-determining  unrelig- 
ious  absolutism.  Says  Richter15  speaking  of  its 
first  appearance  in  the  eighteenth  century  and 
thinking  of  the  scenes  of  1848  of  which  he  was 
an  eye  witness:  "The  divine  foundation  of  the 

15  P.  247. 


266        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

church  was  gone  and  in  its  place  stood  the 
worldly  theory  of  the  social  contract,  upon  which 
was  erected  a  system  of  natural  church  law, 
equally  applicable  to  all  religious  associations 
without  distinction.  .  .  .  This  had  a  very  marked 
influence  upon  the  mental  attitude  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  church.  For  since  it  preached  the 
sovereignty  of  the  association  and  made  the  will 
of  the  individual  members  the  determining  prin- 
ciple, it  thereby  cultivated  an  antagonism  to  the 
existing  law,  which  in  so  many  respects  was  in 
direct  contradiction  to  its  presuppositions,  and 
prepared  the  way  for  the  movement  of  a  later 
time  which  endeavored  to  destroy  the  institution 
of  the  church  and  to  establish  a  constitution  in 
which  there  was  no  place  for  the  words  service, 
duty  and  discipline."  To  which  may  be  added 
a  quotation  from  Petri,16  pastor  in  Hanover, 
who  while  looking  forward  with  hope  to  the  in- 
troduction of  a  more  liberal  constitution  feared 
the  result  of  the  application  of  the  purely  human 
philosophy  by  which  it  was  supported: 

"Whether  justice  and  law  in  their  own  form 
and  constitution  will  be  the  same  for  all,  protect- 
ing impartially  and  without  exception  the  rights 
of  all,  the  prince  upon  his  throne  as  the  citizen 
in  his  business,  and  avenging  every  evil  deed,  or 
whether  they  will  be  merely  the  sharp  sword  with 
which  the  frightful  spirit  of  party  anger  arms 

"Schubert,  102. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        267 

itself  against  life  and  its  rights — whether,  that 
is  to  say,  the  noble,  holy  and  blessed  freedom 
will  stretch  out  her  life  giving  sceptre  over  our 
beloved  Germany,  or  a  frenzied  destructive  pas- 
sion sweep  through  the  unhappy  land,  and  then 
tyranny  with  its  leaden  weight  crush  all  inde- 
pendent life,  this  will  depend  on  which  way  to 
freedom  we  choose.  .  .  .  The  idea  that  a  nation 
is  its  own  source  of  right,  if  that  means  that  a 
nation,  or  those  that  call  themselves  by  this  name, 
determine  what  is  right  of  their  own  free  will 
and  define  the  guarantees  of  right  entirely  of 
their  own  free  will,  is  certainly  wrong.  Just 
as  the  individual  is  not  the  source  of  right  for 
himself  but  dependent  in  his  conscience  on  God 
and  responsible  to  Him,  to  this  same  God  on 
whom  the  individual  is  dependent,  nations  also 
are  dependent.  Oh,  let  it  be  graved  deeply  in 
our  souls  that  true  freedom  is  to  be  found  only 
where  man  is  conscientiously  subject  to  human 
ordinances  for  the  Lord's  sake." 

The  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  saw 
the  return  of  the  religious  note  into  the  govern- 
ment, but  not  the  expulsion  of  natural  law  or  its 
companion  absolutism.  The  latter  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century  and  the  early  years  of  the 
twentieth  have  witnessed  natural  law  with  its 
emphasis  upon  the  rights  of  man,  and  a  freer 
Christianity  with  its  emphasis  upon  service,  con- 
fusedly working  together  for  the  overthrow  of 


268        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

the  absolutism  which  is  felt  as  a  drag  in  both 
church  and  state.  The  voice  of  the  people  can 
now  make  itself  heard  in  diets  and  synods,  and 
doubtless  will  be  more  audible  in  the  future.  But 
neither  in  religious  nor  political  matters  have  the 
German  people  as  yet  advanced  far  beyond  the 
idea  of  their  rights  under  the  law  of  nature  and 
this  alone  goes  a  long  way  toward  explaining 
why  the  establishment  of  more  liberal  institu- 
tions has  been  so  long  delayed.  Only  when  they 
feel  it  to  be  a  moral  duty  will  they  vindicate  for 
themselves  the  liberties  of  which  they  have  talked 
so  long. 

It  is  impossible  that  the  religion  and  freedom 
of  the  German  churches  have  been  so  dominated 
and  controlled  by  the  state  without  leaving  a 
very  marked  impress  upon  the  whole  tone  of  the 
religious  life,  thought  and  endeavor.  Some 
years  ago  Professor  Max  Weber17  and,  building 
upon  his  conclusions,  Professor  Troeltsch,18 
pointed  out  the  different  qualities  of  Lutheran- 
ism  and  Calvinism  respectively  and  attempted  to 
evaluate  them  for  the  modern  world.  Both  are 
characterized  by  what  they  call  an  innerweltliche 
Askese,  or  an  asceticism  practiced  not  in  cloisters 
but  in  the  daily  life  of  the  world.  Behind  it  lies 

17  Die  protestantische  Ethik  und  der  Geist  des  Kapital- 
ismus,  Archiv  fur  Socialwissenscha-ft,  Bde.  xx,  xxi,  xxx,  xxxi. 

18  Protestantism  and  Progress,  English  translation,  1912; 
Kultur  der  Gegenwart,  Teil  I,  Abteilung  4,  ii. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        269 

the  consciousness  of  sin  and  salvation,  of  the  con- 
trast between  this  life  and  the  life  to  come,  but 
in  its  practical  application  it  takes  different 
forms  in  the  two  communions.  Calvinism  looks 
out  upon  the  world  as  a  field  of  labor  which  it  is 
bound  to  reduce  to  order  and  obedience  to  divine 
law.  It  is  aggressive,  orderly,  lacking  in  mere 
sentiment  and  emotion,  restrained  and  disciplined 
and  for  this  reason  has  become  and  remains  the 
carrier  of  modern  civilization.  Lutheranism  on 
the  other  hand  looks  inward,  is  idealistic,  neither 
rationalized  nor  disciplined.  It  is  a  "tone  and 
temper  of  mind,"  "reluctant  to  take  an  active 
part  in  the  world."  It  is  "mainly  a  mere  en- 
durance and  toleration  of  the  world,  which  does 
not  exclude,  indeed,  on  occasion  a  thankful  and 
obedient  joy,  but  is  nevertheless  essentially  a 
self-abnegation  and  submission,  a  transference 
of  all  hope  to  the  blessed  world  of  the  hereafter, 
and  a  rejoicing  in  martyrdom  in  this  world."19 
Its  part,  therefore,  in  the  economic  development 
of  the  modern  world  is  negligible. 

After  what  we  have  seen  of  the  history  of  the 
German  church  could  anything  different  have 
been  expected?  When  has  genuine  Lutheranism 
been  given  an  opportunity  to  work  itself  out  in 
Germany,  and  when  has  it  not  had  cause  to  with- 
draw to  the  secret  recesses  of  its  own  heart  and 
there  take  comfort  for  the  oppression  under 

19  Protestantism  and  Progress,  82  f. 


270        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

which  it  groaned?  Luther's  words,20  "Suffer- 
ing, suffering,  cross,  cross,  these  and  nothing  else 
are  the  rights  of  Christians,"  found  an  echo  in 
many  pious  hearts.  Says  one  of  the  best  village 
pastors  of  the  eighteenth  century:  "If  a  man 
beats  his  dog  the  whole  day  it  will  run  away  and 
seek  another  master  that  will  treat  it  better. 
Now  every  one  beats  the  common  people.  The 
duke  beats  them,  the  soldiers  beat  them,  the 
huntsmen  beat  them.  This  they  will  not  endure, 
but  run  away  and  seek  another  master,  namely, 
Christ;  and  he  who  seeks  Christ  is  a  pietist." 
Quoting  this  passage  Ritschl21  has  pointed  out 
that  the  political  conditions  in  Wiirttemberg  in 
the  time  of  gietism  were  such  as  to  occasion  the 
cultivation _^f_ajreljgion  of  the  heart,  a  turning 
inward  to  escape  the  conditions  without,  and  the 
earnest  desire,  for  ..the  sympathy  and  companion- 
ship of  likeminded  sufferers.  Cannot  the  same 
be  said  of  the  conditions  in  Germany  generally 
since  the  Peasants'  War?  And  is  not  the  modern 
"Community  Movement"  sufficient  proof  of  its 
existence  today? 

In  this  condition,  however,  we  should  see  more 
than  an  occasion  of  sympathy.  There  is  an  ele- 
ment of  danger  in  it.  Persecution  and  fanati- 
cism have  gone  hand  in  hand  through  the  history 
of  the  church,  and  indeed  of  the  world.  Relig- 

20  WA,  xviii,  310. 

21  @e$chichte  des  Pietismus,  ii?  8, 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        271 

iously  minded  men  and  women,  rejected  by  those 
from  whom  they  have  a  right  to  expect  sympathy 
and  support,  excluded  from  the  church  and  made 
the  object  of  the  state's  most  careful  supervision, 
may  be  expected  to  nurse  their  grievances  care- 
fully, to  find  solace  in  the  cultivation  of  the  feel- 
ings, and  to  identify  religion  with  emotionalism. 
That  this  took  place  in  the  eighteenth  century 
and  continues  until  today  there  is  no  doubt.  That 
it  is  more  or  less  characteristic  of  all  German 
piety  is  equally  true,  as  Weber  and  Troeltsch 
assert.  Mysticism  has  found  its  Protestant 
home  in  Lutheran  lands.  During  the  last  hun- 
dred years,  moreover,  the  theology  of  the  emo- 
tions has  not  been  confined  to  the  Separatists, 
Mystics  and  Pietists,  properly  so  called,  but  for- 
tified by  both  the  newer  Pietism  and  the  require- 
ments of  the  state-church  it  has  advanced  to  the 
conquest  of  the  universities  and  the  church,  and 
spread  its  influence  far  beyond  the  limits  of  Ger- 
many. 

For  it  was.  J?igtispi_  with  its  appeal  to  the  re- 
ligious feelings  rather  than  the  reactionary  re- 
vival of  strict  Lutheranism  which  gained— the 
good  will  of  all  classes  of  church  members  after 
the  rationalism  and  naturalism  of  the  eighteenth 
century  were  discredited,  and  the  old  orthodoxy 
dead.  The  feelings  were  declared  to  be  the  court 
of  last  resort  in  religion,  and  the  religion  of  feel- 
ing to  be  sufficient  in  itself,  independent  of  his-; 


272        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

tory,  philosophy,  science  and  indeed  of  any  and 
every  objective  test  or  restriction.  Earlier 
writers  like  Schleiermacher  retained,  it  is  true, 
more  or  less  of  the  old  theology,  but  the  logic 
of  the  premises  demanded  that  this  be  discarded 
and  that  the  religious  feeling  of  the  individual 
or  the  community  be  regarded  as  both  the  testing 
ground  of  religious  truth  and  the  source  of  re- 
ligious knowledge.22 

Parallel  with  this  is  the  endeavor  of  the  state 
to  make  of  the  church  such  an  institution  as  will 
include  all  its  citizens.  For,  however  short  it 
may  come  of  realization,  it  is  inherent  in  the  idea 
of  a  state  church,  that  is  to  say,  of  a  people  which 
regarded  from  the  civil  point  of  view  are  mem- 
bers of  the  state,  and  from  the  religious  point  of 
view  are  members  of  the  church,  that  dogma 
must  be  put,  if  possible,  upon  such  a  plane  that 
no  one  can  reasonably  object  to  it.  The  policy 
of  the  Prussian  rulers  has  been  actuated  by  some 
such  motive.  The  points  of  dispute  between 
Lutherans  and  Calvinists  were  suppressed  and 
discussion  forbidden.  The  preparation  of  a  new 
creed  was  not  allowed.  The  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, the  oldest,  simplest  and  apparently  least 
likely  to  cause  discussion,  was  declared  normative 
for  the  clergy  and  little  was  said  even  of  this.  All 
that  was  required  of  the  laity  was  that  they  be 

22  The  development  is  sketched  in  Professor  McGiffert's 
The  Rise  of  Modern  Religious  Ideas,  1915. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        273 

born  in  the  church  and  obey  orders.  Today  the 
Evangelical  Church  in  Germany  may  include  in 
its  ministry  men  of  every  shade  of  belief  from 
the  most  conservative  and  reactionary  Lutheran 
to  the  advanced  theologian  who  denies  all  author- 
ity of  church,  Bible  or  creeds,  denies  in  toto  the 
story  of  our  Lord's  life  as  recorded  in  the  Gos- 
pels, yes,  who  denies  even  the  very  existence  of 
Jesus  and  places  Nietzsche's  "Zarathustra"  be- 
side the  Bible.23  In  effect,  the  state-church  says 
to  its  members:  believe  what  you  will,  every- 
thing or  nothing,  only  don't  leave  me.  What 
theology,  what  conception  of  religion  and  re- 
ligious truth  could  suit  such  a  situation  so  well 
as  that  which  tells  the  Christian  man  and  Chris- 
tian community  that  they  are  to  find  their  creed 
within  their  own  hearts,  and  that  there  is  no 
higher  or  other  test  of  religious  truth,  no  other 
point  from  which  they  may  draw  religious  knowl- 
edge than  their  own  emotions?  The  fact  is  that 
much  modern  German  theology  is  not  theology 
at  all  but  psychology,  and  that  in  it  there  is  as- 
cribed to  the  human  mind  in  the  sphere  of  re- 
ligion a  creative  power  which  is  defensible  only 
on  the  basis  of  thoroughgoing  subjective  ideal- 
ism. It  would  not  be  fair  to  say  individualistic 
subjective  idealism,  for  adhering  to  the  early 
Christian  or  the  Collegiate  idea  of  the  congrega- 
tion as  the  unit,  the  source  and  test  of  religious 

23  This  was  true  in  the  case  of  Kalthoff,  RE,  xxiii,  724. 


274        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

truth  is  said  to  be  not  the  individual  but  the  com- 
munal consciousness.  In  this  way  religion  be- 
comes Privatsache  (a  private  matter)  in  a  sense 
unknown  to  Luther,  the  early  Pietists  or  even 
Schleiermacher — independent  of  all  authority, 
of  history,  of  science,  of  philosophy,  independent 
even  of  the  existence  of  external  realities  corre- 
sponding to  religious  ideas.  In  other  words,  it 
is  reduced  to  the  one  element  of  subjective  assur- 
ance. And  in  carrying  it  to  this  extreme 
Troeltsch  claims24  to  be  essentially  in  agreement 
with  Luther. 

But  this  is  not  all,  it  is  but  a  step  to  the  next 
and  last  deduction  that  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness, the  purposeful  conviction  or  assurance  of 
the  individual  and  the  community  is  not  only  the 
source  and  test  of  religious  truth,  but  its  creator 
and  determiner.  That  is  to  say,  that  men  or 
communities  or  nations  create  their  own  God, 
who  has  no  necessary  self -existence,  no  objective 
reality,  but  is  none  the  less  really  and  validly 
God.  And  thus  some  German  theologians  have 
returned  consciously,  and  so  with  less  excuse  than 
more  primitive  peoples,  to  the  anthropomorphic 
tribal  God.  One  would  not  dare  to  make  this 
assertion  unless  he  were  prepared  to  support  it 
with  evidence  of  the  event.  A  pastor  in  Holstein 
preaching  before  his  congregation  two  years  ago 

24  Protestantism  and  Progress,  197. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

said:25  "God  is  nothing  but  our  moral  activity, 
our  honest  and  just  dealings,  the  ultimate  and 
deepest  motive  of  our  life  struggle.  God  lives 
in  our  hearts.  And  all  our  prayers  are  a  deep 
and  confident  faith  in  the  victory  of  the  eternal 
and  divine  order  of  things.  Thus  victory  is 
achieved  by  a  nation  from  whose  soul  the  prayer 
incessantly  arises,  pure  and  pious,  humble  and 
trustful:  'God  is  our  help!'  Aye,  verily,  God 
as  the  last,  the  deepest,  the  inmost  foundation 
of  our  soul,  as  the  purity  and  truth  in  our  feel- 
ings, as  the  righteousness  and  honesty  in  our 
actions,  as  the  moral  necessity  of  our  struggle, 
that  God,  as  in  this  war  only  we  Germans  can 
possess  Him,  that  German  God  is  our  best  and 
strongest  help." 

In  this  way  the  "German  God"  is  shown  to  be 
not  the  blasphemous  product  of  pride  but  the 
logical  outcome  of  a  century  of  German  theo- 
logical thought,  conditioned  by  the  suppression 
of  Christian  liberty  and  the  policy  of  the  church- 
state.  It  is,  however,  the  reductio  ad  absurdum 
and  will  work  its  own  cure.  German  Christians 
will  be  the  first  to  repudiate  it.  There  have  been 
signs  too  for  some  time  that  even  in  academic 
circles  the  subjective  theology  was  not  found 
wholly  satisfactory.  And  it  may  be  expected 
that  the  recent  cataclysm  may  have  so  clearly  re- 

25  Pastor  W.  Lehmann  as  quoted  by  Professor  J.  P.  Bang, 
Hurrah  and  Hallelujah,  English  translation,  88. 


276        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

vealed  the  abyss  before  which  they  stood  that 
they  will  be  brought  to  realize  that  the  Gospel 
is  both  simpler  and  deeper  than  their  self -evolved 
conception  of  it,  that  its  doctrines  are  positive, 
objective  and  authoritative,  and  that  whatever 
be  the  necessities  of  political  and  social  life  there 
is  not  room  for  the  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ  and 
the  disciple  of  Nietzsche  at  the  same  communion 
table. 

In  conclusion  let  us  set  over  against  each  other 
two  ideals  now  battling  with  each  other  in  Ger- 
many, the  one  striving  for  the  continuance  of 
the  present  union  of  church  and  state,  the  other 
for  its  dissolution.  Says  Rieker,26  "The  church 
had  been  governed  absolutely  by  the  territorial 
prince,  but  that  had  done  it  no  harm.  For  the 
state  as  such  had  an  evangelical  character  and 
therefore  the  prince  had  no  reasonable  ground 
for  injuring  his  evangelical  church."  "So  long 
as  the  state  regards  it  as  its  duty  to  serve  the 
interests  of  the  Gospel,  so  long  as  the  secular 
authority  remains  a  Christian  authority  and  pro- 
tects and  cherishes  the  evangelical  church  with 
its  strong  arm,  the  church  may  calmly  trust  her- 
self to  it."  "Luther  has  expressed  the  Protest- 
ant ideal  of  the  relation  of  church  and  state  in 
the  words,  'Christ  has  not  two  bodies  or  two 
kinds  of  body,  one  worldly,  the  other  spiritual: 
there  is  one  Head  and  He  has  one  body.' ' 

2e  Pp.  370,  482,  484. 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        277 

Over  against  this  we  may  set  the  words  of  one 
of  the  keenest  modern  critics  of  Luther:27  "There 
is  nothing  falser  than  the  statement  that  the  so- 
called  territorial  church  government  corresponds 
most  closely  to  Luther's  ideals.  It  can  be  main- 
tained, on  the  contrary,  that  the  territorial  church 
government,  in  so  far  as  it  really  is  a  government, 
as  its  name  implies,  is  in  direct  contradiction  to 
Luther's  fundamental  conception  of  religion." 

And  to  this  let  us  add  the  appeal  of  Professor 
Otto  Mayer28  for  the  liberation  of  the  church: 
"The  road  is  indicated  and  laid  out.  External 
obstacles  either  do  not  exist  or  are  surmountable. 
That  is,  however,  not  all.  The  chief  thing  is  that 
the  evangelical  church  must  show  itself  capable 
and  strong  enough  to  take  the  road.  Whoever 
has  doubts  of  this,  and  therefore  advocates  the 
retention  of  the  territorial  church  government  at 
least  provisionally,  and  as  help  in  the  emergency, 
should  open  his  eyes  wide  to  the  fact  that  it  is 
this  very  territorial  church  government  that  is 
responsible  for  the  grounds  of  his  doubts.  Insti- 
tutions train  a  people,  and  the  centuries  of  the 
territorial  church  government  have  educated  the 
evangelical  people  badly;  that  is  certain.  And 
just  for  this  reason  it  is  time  to  abolish  it. 

"First  of  all,  it  has  taken  away  from  the  people 
all  faith  in  themselves.  There  is  even  in  many 

27  Boehmer,  Luther  im  Lichte  der  neueren  Forschung,  169. 

28  RE,  xviii,  726  f. 


£78        PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY 

places  a  real  fear  of  freedom,  as  though  evan- 
gelical Christianity  were  only  waiting,  until  the 
restraining  hand  is  withdrawn,  to  lacerate  itself 
and  cut  itself  up  into  little  pieces.  It  has  dead- 
ened the  feeling  of  responsibility  in  the  members 
of  the  church.  Many  a  hasty  act  here  and  there, 
which  now  shocks  us,  would  have  remained  un- 
done were  it  not  for  the  quieting  thought  that 
the  government  would  take  care  of  things.  It 
has  not  allowed  the  thought  to  emerge  that  every- 
one, as  well  as  the  prince*  and  his  officials,  has  his 
own  duties  to  perform — conscientious  duties  in 
respect  to  the  maintenance  of  the  church.  It  has 
been  as  Montesquieu  says  of  the  monarchical 
state  and  vertu,  civil  virtue,  Tetat  vous  en  dis- 
pense.' The  salvation  and  the  future  of  the 
church  depend  upon  the  recognition  and  per- 
formance of  such  duties.  But  this  can  only  take 
place  under  the  wholesome  discipline  of  freedom ; 
and  therefore  the  first  duty  is  to  attain  this. 
Even  then  everything  will  not  go  smoothly.  On 
the  contrary,  there  is  every  prospect  of  serious 
conflicts  and  hard  work.  The  state  also  will  not 
find  things  so  simple  and  easy  as  before;  but 
when  they  are  more  healthily  and  correctly  regu- 
lated it  too  at  last  will  share  the  benefit." 

Which  of  these  corresponds  with  fact  and 
which  promises  better  for  the  future  of  the 
church  in  Germany  there  can  be  no  doubt  in  the 
light  of  the  history  of  the  territorialism  of  four 


PROTESTANTISM  IN  GERMANY        279 

centuries,  but  the  condition  of  success  today  is 
the  same  as  in  the  days  of  Luther,  namely,  that 
those  that  are  serious  in  their  profession  of  Chris- 
tianity shall  come  forward  and  of  their  own  will 
assume  the  burdens  of  the  church. 


INDEX 


Absolute  monarchy,  254  ff. 
Address  to  the  Nobility,  21,  28, 

33,  59 

Admonition  to  Peace,  7*4 
Against  the  Heavenly  Prophets, 

71 

Albrecht  of  Hohenzollern,  114 
Alstedt,  67,  69 
Altenstein,    165,    170,    172,    187 

f.,  197 
Anabaptists,  14,  52  f.,  67,  72  ff., 

84,  242 

Andrea,  Jacob,  102 
Andrea,  Johann  V.,  253 
Apostolic   Succession,  203 
Assurance,   11,  274 
Augsburg   Confession,   272 
Augusti,  171,  178,  181 

B 

Babylonian   Captivity,   34 
Berlin,    119,    181,    184    f. 
Bible,  Authority  of,  2,  5,  105, 

173 
Bible,   Luther's  Translation,  3, 

12,  78 

Boehme,  Jacob,  141 
Boehmer,  52  n.,  138,  277 
Brandenburg,  116 
Brenz,  97 

C 
Calvinism,   54   f.,   83,   130,    158, 

175,  190  f.,  195,  246  ff.,  251  f., 

255,  269  f. 

Calvin,  John,  1,  83,  101,  261 
Canon  Law,  24,  59,  95,  108,  128 
Carlstadt,  43,  64  f.,  66,  69,  71  f., 

84 

Carpzov,  J.  B.,  140 
Chamberlain,  Stuart,  9 
Charles  I  of  England,  262 


Chemnitz,    127 
Christian  Freedom,  25 
Church  Union,  146  f.,  174  f. 
Clergy,  106  ff.,  127,  168,  218  ff. 
Collegiate  Theory,  136  ff.,  156 
Community   Movement,  243   ff., 

270 

Concord,  Book  of,  2 
Consistory,  89,  95,  103,  128,  173, 

234 

Constantine,  56,  91 
Constitution  in  Rhine  Country, 

192 

Constitution  of  1848,  205  f. 
Constitution  of  1851,  206  f. 
Constitution   01    1873,    192,   210 
ff.,  219  f.,  221,  233  f. 

D 
Discipline,  77,  96,  151,  228,  230 

f.,  246  11. 
Distelmeyer,   116 
Divine    right    of    civil    govern- 
ment, 59  f.,  125   f.,  255  f. 
Divine  right  of  clergy,  109  ff., 

130  f.,  229  f. 
Doctrine,  30,   33,  35,   198,  249, 

272 
Drews,  80  n.,  224  ff. 

E 

Elders,  97,  98  f.,  233. 
Election  of  Pastors,  33  ff.,  39, 

41 

"Emergency   Bishops,"   89,   129 
Emotionalism,  244,  269   ff. 
England,  263  f. 
"Enlightenment,"  5  ff.,  134,  144, 

154 

Episcopacy,  14,  147,  178  f.,  203 
Episcopal  Theory,  124  ff.,  140, 

171 
Erasmus,  78 


280 


INDEX 


281 


Evangelical    Church,    203,    206, 

209   f.,  212,  215 
Exposition  of  Psalm  CX,  34 

F 

Fichte,  8 

Force,  Use  of,  64,  79 
Foerster,   156 

Frankfort,  Parliament  of,  204  f. 
Frederick  I  of  Prussia,  146 
Frederick  the  Great,   148,   157, 

159 
Frederick  the  Wise,  59,  64,  73, 

85 

Frederick  William  I,  148 
Frederick  William  II,  157  ff. 
Frederick  William  III,  164  ff., 

232 

Frederick  William  IV,  202,  209 
Free  Church  of  Scotland,  201 

G 

Gerhard,  125 
"German  God,"  274  f. 
German  Mass,  46,  47  ff.,  98  f., 

233,  243 
Geneva;  246  ff. 
Great  Elector,  145 

H 

Hamburg,  42,  238 
Herder,    16 
Heresy,  122 
Herrmann,  11 
Hesse,  44   ff.,  95,  98,  215,  220, 

234,  253 

Homberg,  Council  of,  44  ff.,  51, 
61,  98 

I 

Iconoclasm,  63,  66,  70  f. 
Instructions  for  Visitors,  94 
Intolerance,  251  f. 

J 

James  I  of  England,  177 
John,  Elector  of  Saxony,  61,  85 
John  Sigismund,  117  ff.,  144 

K 

Kalthoff,  273 
Konigsberg,  University  of,  115 

L 
Lambert,  Francis,  46 


Land    Law,    Prussian,    150    ff., 

167   f.,  181,  183,  184 
Law  of  Nature,  134  ff.,  253  f., 

262,  265   f. 
Leisnig,  39,  43,  80  n. 
Lehmann,  W.,  275 
Letter  to  Senate  . . .  of  Prague, 

41 
Liturgy  of   Frederick   William 

III,  179  ff. 
Luther,  passim 

M 

Machiavelli,   58   f. 
Magdeburg,  43,  203 
Marburg,  University  of,  45,  47, 

100 

Marheineke,  185 
Marriage,  94  f. 
Mayer,  Otto,  212,  277  f. 
Melanchthon,  64,  80,  84,  94,  107 
Mirbt,  Carl,  159 
Miinzer,  Thomas,  72  ff. 
Mysticism,  11,  271 

N 

Nantes,  Edict  of,  142,  145 
Nicea,  Council  of,  91 
Nietzsche,    10,  273,  276 
Nobility,  112  ff.,  119  ff.,  225 
Non-conformity,  264 
Non-resistance,  261  258  f. 

O 

Oath  of  Allegiance,  166 
"Old   Lutherans,*'   203 
Organization  of  Lutheran 

Church,   89 
Orlamund,  42,  66  ff.,  84 

P 

Pastors,  duties  of,  220 
Pastors,  village,  221  ff. 
Patronage,  66,  174,  204,  223  ff. 
Peasants'  War,  53,  74  ff.,  235, 

242 

Petri,  266 
Pfaff,  136  ff. 
Philip  of  Hesse,  44,  46,  61,  84, 

85 
Pietism,  4,  130  ff.,  144,  231,  238 

f.,  242,  265,  270 


INDEX 


Pomerania,  108,  190 
Power  of  Princes,  58,  121  ff. 
Presbyterian  organization,  209  f . 
Priesthood   of   believers,   22    f., 

29   f.,  32,  34,  42 
Proof    and    Reason    from    the 

Scripture,  etc.,  39 
Prussia,  44,  113,  143,  16-4,  223, 

245 

R 

Rationalism,  232,  239  f. 
Reinginck,  125,  128 
Religious  Liberty,  36,  39,  204 
Resistance,    Right    of,    257    f., 

261  f. 

Richter,  53,  265 
Rieker,  17,  21,  37  f.,  52,  53,  91 

f.,  104,  162,  276  f. 
Ritschl,  11,  270 
S 

Sarcerius,  228 
Saxony,  47,  99,  102,  102  f.,  143, 

252 

Scheibel,  194  ff. 
Schleiermacner,  168,  169,  184  ff., 

205,  240  f.,  272 
Schupp,  222,  236  f. 
Schwenckfeld,  82  n.,  84 
Secular    authority,    concerning, 

35 

feeeberg,  15 
Sehling,  54,  103,  121 
Self   government   of   congrega- 
tions, 33  ff.,  39,  48  ff.,  62  ff., 

96  ff.,  156  ff.,  213,  226,  235 
Separatism,  136  f.,  242  ff. 
Silesia,  191,  193  ff. 
Social  Democrats,  241 
Spener,  130  ff.,  231,  239 
Spires,  Diet  of,  1526,  46,  60,  90 


Spires,  Diet  of,  1529,  257 
Stuarts,  policy  of,  200  ff. 
Superintendents,  89 
Synods  of  1818,  176 
Synod  of  1846,  203 
Synod   of   1876,  210 

T 

Territorial  System,  88  ff. 
Territorial  Theory,  140,  171 
Teutonic  Knights,  114 
Thomasius,   134,   138,   140,  250 
Toleration    in    Prussia,    119    f., 

144   f.,   148 
Troeltsch,  268,  271,  274 

U 
Uniformity,  23,  175,  179 

V 

Visitation,  47,  61,  89  f.,  121,  235 
Von  Bezold,  83,  85 
Von  Kamptz,  171 
Von  Stein,  173,  221,  254 
Von  Treitschke,  202 
Von  Zezschwitz,  54 

W 

Waldeck,  96 
Wartburgfest,  177 
Weber,  Max,  268,  271 
Werner,  7 
Westphalia,  191 
Westphalia,  Treaty  of,  144,  148, 

252 

William  I,  210 
Wittenberg,  2,  42,  63  ff.,  95 
Wollner  Edict,  157 
Wurtemberg,  97,  222,  231,  234, 
238,  245,  270 

Z 

Zorn,  103 
Zwingli,  46,  84,  102 


/  It  ~l, 


7 


*>     HP  -, 


- 


f 


V^  a-^-»         I 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  aresufe^u  u>  in>nn"ltT|te  recalL 


MAR  2  6  1966  2  1 


REC!DLn 


NOV  11 


LD  21A-50m-3,'62 
(C7097slO)476B 


General  Library 
University  of  California 


YC  44789 


: 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CAUFORNIA  LIBRARY 


